ITAT Mumbai held that passing of assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act without disposing the objections raised by the assessee is not sustainable being without jurisdiction. Accordingly, reassessment notice u/s. 148 set aside.
DCIT Vs K Raheja IT Park (Hyderabad) Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai dismissed appeals filed by the revenue challenging the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)’s order regarding deductions claimed under Section 80IA(4)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by K Raheja IT Park (Hyderabad) Ltd. The appeals pertained to assessment […]
ITAT Bangalore ruled on the taxability of Transferable Development Rights (TDR) in the case of Smt. Sowmya Sathyan vs. ITO, clarifying its classification under income tax laws.
ITAT Pune ruled on capital gains in Smt. Vimal Baburao Jadhav Vs ITO. The Tribunal held Section 50C inapplicable, recalculating LTCG based on actual transactions.
ITAT Pune allows Foreign Tax Credit for Kasper Pieter Tideman, ruling that Form 67 filing is procedural, not mandatory. Read the case details and key judicial precedents.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that where Commissioner (Appeals) passed ex-parte order in violation of principles of natural justice, one more opportunity should be granted to assessee. Accordingly, matter restored back to CIT(A) for de-novo consideration.
Assessee-company was involved in manufacturing tractors, agricultural equipment, and spare parts, also operated a technology center providing IT and engineering services to Deer Associates.
PCIT was not justified in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 in the case of Bank of Maharashtra allowing deduction under Section 36(1)(via) as Assessing Officer’s (AO) assessment order was not erroneous, even if it was prejudicial to the interest of revenue.
Aggrieved by the order passed by AO, assessee moved on with an appeal to CIT(A), where assessee challenged the reopening of the assessment, arguing that Section 148 was not justified.
Zoho Corporation’s attempt to deduct foreign taxes as business expenses under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act was rejected by the ITAT Chennai. The tribunal upheld the disallowance, citing Section 40(a)(ii) and emphasizing the distinction between foreign tax credit under Section 90/91 and business expense deductions. This ruling clarifies the limitations on claiming foreign tax deductions and reinforces the interpretation of relevant tax provisions.
