An in-depth analysis of the case between Majestic Properties Pvt. Ltd and PCIT at ITAT Delhi. The case examines the limitations of revisionary power under section 263 based on audit objections. Discover key outcomes and implications.
ITAT Delhi held that as shares were acquired prior to 01.04.2017, gain derived from sale of such equity shares is exempt under Article 13(4) of India-Mauritius DTAA.
Learn about the ITAT Delhi’s ruling on FIL India Business & Research Services Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT, where technical issues on EPFO’s portal excused a PF delay.
ITAT Delhi held that entire addition towards unexplained investment under section 69 of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of presumption is unsustainable in law.
An in-depth analysis of the ITAT Delhi case between ACIT and International Recreation Parks. Learn why income taxed as house property can’t be taxed as business income later.
Egis International S.A. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Delhi recently adjudicated a noteworthy case involving Egis International S.A. and Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT). The core issue revolved around whether non-compliance with an e-notice, due to the concerned employee leaving the company, could be considered a “reasonable cause.” The […]
Analysis of ITAT Delhis ruling in Luxor Writing Instruments (P) Ltd Vs DCIT. The tribunal clarifies that the waiver of a loan does not amount to cessation of trading liability under Section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act.
Analyzing the recent ITAT Delhi ruling in Navneet Bhardwaj Vs PCIT, which nullified a revisionary order under section 263 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2016-17, touching upon the legal intricacies and implications.
Held that the cash sales and corresponding cash deposits have been a regular feature of the business of the assessee and there is certainly no abnormal trend of cash sales and cash deposit during the demonetization period. Accordingly, addition deleted.
ITAT Delhi held that attribution of profit from offshore supply and services to the Permanent Establishment unsustainable as assessee didn’t have any Permanent Establishment in India in the assessment years under dispute.
