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 : ITAT Pune restored the Section 10(10AA) leave encashment claim to the AO only for verification of the quantum based on supporting ...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore deleted the DAPE-based business income addition where the Indian AE was at arm's length and remanded the refund int...
Income Tax : Hyderabad ITAT quashed Section 148 reassessment, holding actual escaped income below ₹50 lakh cannot justify extended limitation...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai deleted an addition of ₹17.10 lakh after holding that it was based solely on third-party information and estimated ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai upheld taxation of only 25% profit on alleged on-money receipts, rejected Section 69C addition of entire amount and su...
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 Ahmedabad dismisses Revenue’s appeal due to low tax effect under CBDT Circular No. 09/2024. The case involved taxability of interest income on project funds.
ITAT Delhi remands appeal to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication due to denial of personal hearing in Kumar Kanti Das Vs ACIT case for AY 2017-18.
ITAT Surat remands case to AO for verification of Rs. 15.71 Lakh liability under Section 41(1) due to lack of evidence of payment and TDS deduction.
Clause (ba) of sub-section (1) of section 12A was applicable for AY.2018-19 onwards and not for AY.2017-18, assessee-temple trust was entitled to tax exemptions under Sections 11 and 12 . Hence, the order of AO was not erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue and therefore, it was not amenable to revision u/s 263.
This article explores the binding nature of tribunal orders, exceptions, and the role of larger benches in maintaining judicial consistency in taxation matters.
Assessee is an individual filed his Return of Income for AY 2013-14 at Rs.10,98,540/-. During the year consideration, assessee along with other co-owners sold two immovable properties for a consideration of Rs.1,20,60,000/- and Rs.1,85,40,000/-.
ITAT Kolkata held that the disallowance u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules should be restricted to the dividend yielding investments. Accordingly, AO directed to re-compute disallowance.
In the case abovementioned ITAT Ahmedabad remanded the matter to CIT (A) after considering that assessee could not file evidence before CIT (A) in lack of service of notices.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that section 275(1A) of the Income Tax Act empowers AO to pass penalty order by enhancing or reducing penalty on the basis of assessment as revised by giving effect to orders passed by appellate authority or courts.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the income of beneficiaries of trust cannot be treated as income in the hands of the trust. Accordingly, disallowance under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act not justified.
