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...
Explore key ITAT decisions on TCS, TDS credit, and warranty provisions in Ahmedabad, clarifying tax compliance and procedural requirements.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that PFRDA Act, 2013 doesn’t prescribed any due date for payment of employee’s contribution to National Pension Scheme (NPS). Thus, since payment is made before filing return u/s. 139(1), the same is allowable u/s. 43B(b) of the Income Tax Act.
The disallowance occurred due to an incorrect entry in the ITR, and the matter should be reassessed, taking into account the correct disclosure of the loss.
The evidences relied upon by AO in the form of excel sheets did not constitute adequate evidence to draw adverse inference against tassessee, in the absence of any other corroborative evidences.
Since cooperative banks were considered cooperative societies for the purpose of Section 80P(2)(d), thereby making assessee’s interest and dividend income eligible for deduction.
Assessee was a private limited company registered as a non-banking finance company (NBFC) with the RBI, engaged in providing loans, advances, and dealing in shares and securities.
The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny for the reasons of cash deposit during the demonetization. During assessment, AO noted that assessee have made cash deposit of Rs.10,50,000/- in his bank account.
ITAT Surat held that addition on account of cash deposit during demonetization confirmed by both AO and CIT(A) by passing ex-parte order. However, majority of cash deposits are prior to demonetization period. Hence, matter remanded back for fresh verification.
Assessee was engaged in the business of slimming and beauty services. During assessment proceedings, AO observed that assessee was carrying substantial credit balances as current liabilities under the head ‘Advance from customers’.
ITAT Surat held that when any expense is not claimed, no disallowance is permissible. Accordingly, disallowance u/s. 43B on account of unpaid service tax not warranted as the same is not claimed as deduction in P&L account.
