ITAT Mumbai held that assessee claimed benefit u/s 54 on a different document, whereas ultimately the transaction completed on altogether a different set of conditions and property, which is not permissible to claim benefit u/s. 54 of the Act. Accordingly, benefit u/s. 54 denied.
Analyzing ITAT Mumbai’s landmark ruling in the case of ITO Vs Sanjay Mahabir Maheshka that deems income from share sales via Demat account as not Unexplained Income under section 68.
A detailed analysis of ITAT Mumbai ruling in Surti Modh Vanik Jagruti Mandal Vs ITO (E). Learn why ITAT found CIT(E) rejection of the trust unsustainable.
DCIT Vs Milan Kavinchandra Parikh (ITAT Mumbai) Introduction: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai recently delivered a pivotal judgment in the case between the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (DCIT) and Milan Kavinchandra Parikh. The judgment raises key questions surrounding the jurisdiction of penalties levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This […]
ITAT Mumbai in ITO vs Mahavir Enterprises case held that consideration paid by assessee, being higher/successful bidder, of e-tender floated by bank is fair market value of property
Analysis of the ITAT Mumbai ruling in the case of Damco India Pvt Ltd Vs CIT. Key insights into why the AO must grant advance tax credits overlooked by the taxpayer.
ITAT Mumbai held that in terms of General Clauses Act, 1897 period of six month mentioned in Section 54EC of the Income Tax Act has to be regarded as six British Calendar months.
ITAT Mumbai held that in case of company is involved in providing illicit LTCG/ short term capital loss (accommodation entries), a substantial addition has to be made in the hands of beneficiaries and only a protective assessment can be made in the hands of company providing such accommodation entries.
ITAT Mumbai held that Nostro Account Maintenance Charges are in the nature of bank charges levied on transaction and the same are not subject to tax deduction at source u/s. 195 of the Act. Accordingly, disallowance of the same by invoking provisions of Section 40(a)(i) of the Act unjustified.
ITAT Mumbai ruling in DCIT Vs Sai Sugam Enterprises. declares penalty notices under section 274 as invalid if not specifying charge against assessee.
