ITAT Surat held that delayed filing of Form 10B is a procedural lapse and remanded the matter after directing the AO to consider the audit report.
ITAT Surat held that existing charitable institutions obtaining provisional approval for the first time should not be denied regular approval merely because their activities commenced before the amended registration regime. The matters were remanded for fresh consideration.
ITAT Surat held that absence of satisfaction in the assessment order invalidated the Section 271D penalty, following the Supreme Court’s ruling.
ITAT condoned the filing delay and remanded the case to the CIT(E) to examine whether the trust satisfies all 80G requirements.
White Willow Vs ITO (ITAT Surat) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Surat allowed the assessee’s appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre for Assessment Year 2014-15, which had upheld the addition of ₹1.50 crore under Section 68 on account of unsecured loans and the disallowance of interest expenditure of ₹7,18,581. The […]
ITAT Surat held that rural agricultural land falls outside Section 2(14), deleting capital gains and related additions.
The ITAT Surat held that cash deposited during demonetisation was sufficiently explained through opening cash-in-hand, prior bank withdrawals, and cash received from the deceased husband. It ruled that Section 69A addition could not be sustained merely on assumptions about human conduct.
The ITAT held that the entire value of purchases from an alleged accommodation entry provider cannot be added as income. It directed the Assessing Officer to tax only the profit element by applying a 5% higher net profit rate.
The Tribunal held that rebate under section 87A could not be denied merely because LTCG exceeded Rs.1 lakh. It ruled that the relevant consideration was the tax computed on such gains, leading to deletion of the adjustment made under section 143(1).
ITAT Surat held that additions relating to credit card payments and cash deposits could not be sustained when the assessee had explained them through sales of Amway products and commission income. The Tribunal found that these details had been overlooked by the tax authorities.
