ITAT Bangalore allows appeal, deleting addition for demonetization cash deposit, accepting claim of mother’s savings as source. (159 Characters)
Provisions of Section 44AB, which mandate Tax audit, are not applicable to fictional income provisions like Section section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C& 69D
ITAT Bangalore deletes additions under Section 69 citing presumptive taxation under Section 44AD and lack of supporting evidence by the AO.
ITAT Bangalore sends Light Ray Advisors LLP’s dividend exemption claim back to AO for re-examination, noting potential oversight of filed documents.
ITAT Bangalore upheld CIT(A)’s acceptance of additional evidence in local language, dismissing AO’s addition under Section 69A. Read the case details here.
ITAT Bangalore set aside penalty orders under Section 271B due to improper notice delivery to an unrelated email ID and failure to provide adequate response time.
ITAT Bangalore rules in favor of Udaya Ravi Arecanut Co., stating that tax retention without legal backing is unjust. Case remitted for fresh adjudication.
ITAT Bangalore held that the assesse is entitled to claim deduction u/s. 54 of the Act if the assesses able to establish the fact that the construction was commenced within the period prescribed of 3 years under the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Bangalore sets aside ex-parte order against senior citizen, ruling that email-only notices denied a fair hearing. Case remanded for fresh adjudication.
Advocate Amardeep Soni & Advocate Harsha Soni Gemplus India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) A Case Study of ITAT BANGALORE BENCH ‘A’ Gemplus India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-11(4), Bangalore [2010] 3 taxmann.com 755 (Bangalore – Trib.) Abstract: The practice of cost allocation and transfer pricing is integral to multinational corporations (MNCs) […]
