Delhi ITAT deleted a ₹30.65 lakh cash deposit addition made under Section 69A during demonetization. The source was proven to be a gift from the deceased grandmother’s savings of previously taxed rental income, preventing double taxation.
Delhi ITAT deleted a Rs.1000 crore addition made under Section 68 based solely on an SFIO report alleging circular fund rotation. The Tribunal upheld reopening but limited the addition to estimated commission income, ensuring parity with group cases.
Recurring advisory/consultancy services without transfer of know-how/technical skill did not satisfy “make available” requirement under Article 12(4)(b) DTAA and therefore, payments couldn’t be taxed as FTS.
The ITAT Delhi has set aside tax additions made to Divya Exim Pvt. Ltd. and other assessees. The tribunal ruled that in completed assessments, additions cannot be based solely on third-party statements without corroborating incriminating material found during a search.
ITAT Delhi in RSWM Ltd. Khari Gram vs DCIT examines disputed additions under Section 69, allowability of education cess, and treatment of FPS/FMS, TUFS, and RIPS subsidies, emphasizing reliance on evidence and judicial precedents.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Delhi has set aside a significant tax addition against Maple Destinations, ruling that the reassessment was based on uncorroborated, retracted statements and a denial of the assessee’s right to cross-examination, which violated principles of natural justice.
The ITAT Delhi has set aside the reassessment of Avon Containers, ruling the Income Tax Department’s notice void.
The ITAT Delhi ruled that a UK company’s receipts from Indian airlines for in-flight content are not taxable as royalty or fees for technical services, as no copyright or technical know-how was transferred.
The ITAT Delhi ruled that receipts for online journal access are business income, not royalty. The court held that without a Permanent Establishment, a US company’s income is not taxable in India.
The ITAT Delhi ruled in Dalmia Bharat vs. DCIT that a company’s gain from canceling a forward contract for machinery imports is a capital receipt, not taxable as business income.
