ITAT Judgment contain Income Tax related Judgments from Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Across India which includes ITAT Mumbai, Chennai, Delhi, Kolkutta, Hyderabad etc.
Income Tax : Article examines whether the MLI Principal Purpose Test has domestic effect under Section 90(1) following Nestlé SA and Sky High ...
Corporate Law : The article argues that failure to comply before the AO or CIT(A) can lead to adverse assessments, as higher forums generally cann...
Income Tax : ITAT held that Section 54 exemption must be examined separately for each residential house sold. Aggregating gains from multiple t...
Income Tax : ITAT held that delayed filing of Form 10B cannot defeat Section 11 exemption if the audit report is available before processing un...
Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held Section 2(47)(v) inapplicable as the JDA did not satisfy Section 53A conditions, deleting capital gains for AY...
Income Tax : The issue concerns massive backlog in ITAT caused by unfilled positions and delayed appointments. The intervention highlights that...
Income Tax : A representation seeks doubling the SMC threshold due to inflation and higher dispute values. The key takeaway is that increasing ...
Income Tax : The tribunal held that a gift deed alone cannot establish legitimacy under Section 68. It directed fresh scrutiny of the donor’s...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT allows Sanco Holding, a Norwegian company, to compute income from bareboat charter of seismic vessels under Article 21(...
Income Tax : Chennai ITAT restored Section 12AA registration, holding uncorroborated capitation fee allegations alone cannot justify cancellati...
Income Tax : Chennai ITAT held that seized Tally data alone cannot justify bogus purchase additions without corroborative evidence, while susta...
Income Tax : ITAT Surat dismissed Revenue’s appeal, upholding deletion of Section 10AA addition and holding no other issue could be added in ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai deleted addition on interest from overseas branches, allowed hub expenses and upheld deductions including broken perio...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi partly allowed the assessee’s appeals and dismissed the Revenue’s appeal in Section 263 revision and related assess...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi has revised its hearing notice protocols. Physical notices will now be sent only once, with subsequent dates availa...
Income Tax : ITAT Chandigarh held that ITO Ward-3(1), Chandigarh had no jurisdiction to issue notice to an NRI and hence consequently the asses...
Income Tax : Central Government is pleased to appoint Shri G. S. Pannu, Vice-President of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, as President of th...
Income Tax : Ministry of Finance notified rules for appointment of members in various tribunals on 12.02.2020 in which practice of judicial and...
Income Tax : Bhagyalaxmi Conclave Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) In the remand report, the AO clearly stated that notice u/s 143(2) of the Ac...
ITAT Mumbai held that reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act beyond 3 years liable to be quashed as escaped income is less than INR 50,00,000. Thus, notice issued u/s. 148 quashed.
Search action was carried out on residential premises of assessee. Several incriminating documents were found and seized. Assessee was issued with notice to file Income Tax Return and seeking details for seven assessment years within 5 days.
ITAT Bangalore held that non-granting of accumulation of income under section 11(2) due to delay in filing Form 10 not justified since delay was condoned by appropriate authority. Accordingly, appeal allowed in favour of assessee.
It was submitted of behalf of assessee that the appeal filed by the Revenue is hit by recently issued CBDT Circular No.09 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 revising the previous thresholds pertaining to tax effects.
In the matter abovementioned ITAT Delhi vitiated penalty proceedings after examining that non mentioning of charge for which penalty is to be levied makes the notice as much defective as non striking of irrelevant clauses in the notice.
In the matter abovementioned ITAT deleted addition made on account of undisclosed cash deposits during demonetization period after observing that assessee has substantiate means of income for depositing cash.
IT Department during demonetization (from November 9, 2016, to December 30,2016) identified various individuals who had deposited substantial sums of cash, under the initiative “Operation Clean Money”.
Aggrieved by this order, assessee filed an appeal before Tribunal. It was held that CIT(E) had not examined the objects and activities of assessee trust which were the twin conditions for granting registration under Section 12A/12AB
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition u/s. 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act justified due to difference stamp duty value of the property and sale consideration. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee allowed.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that interest income earned from business activity is classifiable as business income and accordingly, relevant expenses allowed as deduction. Hence, appeal of the assessee allowed.
