Follow Us:

All ITAT

Denial of FTC for delay in filing of Form No. 67 not justified: ITAT Kolkata

December 17, 2024 915 Views 0 comment Print

The assessee filed his return of Income on 27.08.2019. After filing the return, assessee received intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act dated 23.03.2021 and found that relief under section 90 of the Act had not been allowed amounting to Rs 73,658/-.

Delay of 1809 days condoned on reasonable cause shown: ITAT Bangalore

December 17, 2024 1011 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Bangalore held that delay of 1809 days in filing of an appeal condoned since reasonable cause shown for the delay. Accordingly, appeal allowed and AO directed to allow Foreign Tax Credit after due verification of Form 67.

Delay in filing of appeal condoned since delay not deliberate or intentional: ITAT Surat

December 17, 2024 1434 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Surat held that the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) is not deliberate or intentional or due to gross negligence on the part of the assessee. Accordingly, delay of more than 2 years condoned and matter remanded back to CIT(A).

Tribunal upheld CIT(A) addition of alleged bogus purchases citing genuine sales and statement retraction

December 16, 2024 1395 Views 0 comment Print

Without purchases, there would have been no sales. AO’s claim of inflated purchases to reduce tax liability was not substantiated, as all 10 transactions of diamond purchase and sale were documented with relevant details.

No addition of Rs.10 Crore u/s 271(1)(C) without specification of concealment or inaccurate particulars in SCN

December 16, 2024 834 Views 0 comment Print

Addition of Rs.10 Crore under Section 271(1)(c) was not justified as Revenue failed to specify whether the addition was being made alleging concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.

Addition u/s. 28(iv) towards import of assets free of cost not justified since no benefit derived

December 16, 2024 1158 Views 0 comment Print

The assessee is a wholly owned subsidiary of Samsung Electronics Company Ltd. The assessee filed the return of income for AY 2015-16 on 30.11.2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 238,85,10,090/-.

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) not leviable in case of debatable issue: ITAT Ahmedabad

December 16, 2024 1473 Views 0 comment Print

Thus, penalty is not warranted on issues where a substantial question of law exists, indicating that the matter is not free from doubt. Accordingly, we quash the penalty order under section 271(1) (c) of the Act.

Deduction under other provisions will be restricted when profit already granted deduction u/s. 80-IA

December 16, 2024 432 Views 0 comment Print

The AO added excise duty and sales tax to the total turnover while excluding lease rent and other incomes, categorizing them as “Income from Other Sources” rather than “Business Income”.

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c)/ 271AAB imposable even on voluntary disclosure of income: ITAT Pune

December 16, 2024 1356 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Pune held that penalty under section 271(1)(c)/ 271AAB of the Income Tax Act imposable even in case of voluntary disclosure or declaration or surrender per se of income. Accordingly, appeal filed by revenue allowed.

Cost imposed on assessee due to non-compliance with opportunities granted by CIT(A)

December 16, 2024 534 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Ahmedabad held that CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance of the opportunities granted to the assessee. Accordingly, cost of Rs. 10,000 imposed on the assessee and matter remanded back to CIT(A).

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930