In the case of Patel Ambalal Haridas – HUF Vs ITO, ITAT Ahmedabad orders re-evaluation of land value under section 50C, pointing to a failure to consider the Jantri value and Valuation Report. The case impacts how land value is assessed for capital gains tax purposes.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition on account of deemed dividend as per section 2(22)(e) of the Act unsustainable in the hands of non-shareholders.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that income is not taxable in India merely because the overseas employer paid salary into NRE account of the assessee in India.
ITAT Ahmedabad has allowed the appeal of Kanta Govind Singh against the levy of a late filing fee under section 234E for a TDS return. The appellant, a senior citizen, had promptly deposited the TDS amount but had inadvertently filed the return late due to old age and human error. The ITAT deemed the procedural error as not warranting the imposition of a heavy late filing fee under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act.
A deep dive into the Kute Sons Dairys Ltd Vs PCIT case, highlighting implications of an assessment completed without proper inquiry and legal justifications for invoking revision u/s 263.
ITAT Ahmedabad remands Bhavesh Sureshchandra Shah’s case back to the AO for detailed verification of a Rs. 2.09 crores unexplained income claim, highlighting the need for comprehensive examination of bank statements and evidence.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that benefit of exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied merely on account of delay in furnishing of audit report in Form No. 10B.
ITAT Ahmedabad’s decision in case of ONGC Employees Co-op Credit & Thrift Society Limited Vs ITO, provides insight into exemption of interest income under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of Income Tax Act.
ITAT’s ruling affirms that a Co-operative Society can claim deductions for the interest income derived from a Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) with a Co-operative Bank.
ITAT Ahmedabad in Sureshbhai Ashwinbhai Patel Vs ITO clarified that complete sale consideration from such a property cannot be attributed as capital gain of a single co-owner.
