ITAT Mumbai has directed AO to obtain the complete information and examine whether assessee has only leasehold right or complete rights over the property so that provisions of section 50C of the Income Tax Act are attracted.
In the case of Bhagyashree Manohar, it was determined that the assessee should not suffer due to non-filing of material information. Considering the new evidences, the case was set aside, and the issues were restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.
ITAT Mumbai held that issuance of notice for re-opening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act against the deceased assessee is null in the eyes of law.
Insightful analysis of the ITAT Mumbai ruling in the case of Qayum Ismail Mukaddam Vs CIT, where the applicability of changes in sec 139(4) & 139(5) by Finance Act 2016 is discussed.
ITAT Mumbai held that the provisions of Sec. 56(2)(x) of the Act are incorporated in the Finance Act 2017 with the prospective applicability from A.Y.2017-18 and the transactions entered into prior to 1.04.2017 would not suffer any implications of the section.
An overview of the ITAT Mumbai ruling in Hitesh Shantilal Mehta Vs DCIT, where the Tribunal deleted an addition by disallowance of interest expenses accrued from investments in shares and securities
Read about dismissal of an appeal by ITAT Mumbai in case of BLPL Singapore Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT. Sssessee’s appeal against penalty order under Section 270A for non-disclosure of interest income was dismissed.
ITAT Mumbai held that order passed without considering the documents and without examining the correct residential status of the assessee is liable to be restore back for de novo adjudication.
ITAT Mumbai held that disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act cannot exceed the amount of exempt income. Hence, AO directed to restrict the disallowance to the extent of exempt income earned.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained cash credit sustained as identity and creditworthiness of the parties and genuineness of the transaction not proved.
