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 : The Tribunal held that cash deposits during demonetisation cannot be treated as unexplained when backed by audited books, invoices...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that non-specification of the precise statutory charge under sections 270A(2) and 270A(9) violated principles o...
Income Tax : The Delhi ITAT held that institutions engaged in preservation of environment fall under a specific charitable limb under Section 2...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that CIT(A) cannot enhance income under Section 251 on matters not considered by the Assessing Officer during as...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore restored the Section 54F claim after noting that medical issues and portal difficulties prevented timely filing of ...
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 : Learn about hybrid hearing guidelines of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Indore Bench, effective from October 9, 2023, offeri...
Income Tax : The Mumbai ITAT held that the appellate authority failed to consider pending writ petitions and interim directions of the Bombay H...
Income Tax : The ITAT Chennai held that exemption under Section 11 cannot be denied merely because Form 10B was not filed along with the return...
Income Tax : The ITAT Bangalore held that gains arising from buyback of shares are taxable under Section 46A because the conditions prescribed ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that incomplete WhatsApp chats without proof of completed transactions cannot justify additions under Section 69A...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that penalty under Section 271AAC cannot survive once the underlying Section 153C assessment is quashed. The Tribu...
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 allows Rental Expenses for Property taken on Rent for Business Purpose. Learn about the ruling on Appeal by the Revenue for AY 2014-15. Google ITAT Order for Delhi.
Read the detailed analysis of DCIT vs. Agni Estates & Foundations Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Chennai) case. ITAT upholds deletion of disallowance of sponsorship expenses and interest under Income Tax Act.
Understand the implications of ITAT Delhi’s decisions on Professional Fees Share Purchase Agreement Drafting Revenue Expenditure for AY 16-17. Explore ACIT vs. SSP Pvt. Ltd case & the dispute related to advocate fees and advertisement expenses.
In a significant ruling, ITAT Delhi upholds deletion of cash addition in DCIT vs. Atul Gupta case for AY 2017-18 after demonetization. Get the full order details here
ITAT quashes penalty order under section 271D as it was time-barred. Detailed analysis of Ram Kishan Verma Vs Additional CIT (ITAT Jaipur) case.
ITAT Ahmedabad deleted the addition towards unexplained cash credit as AO failed to conduct independent inquiry and addition was made merely for the reason that there was minor difference in amount of cash deposited vis-à-vis amount of demand draft and amount of invoice.
ITAT Mumbai held that as the assessee should be aware of the exact charge for which the penalty proceeding has been initiated, non-striking on the irrelevant limb under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act vitiates the entire penalty proceedings.
ITAT Bangalore held that initiation of proceedings against the person other than the searched person under section 148, instead of section 153C, of the Income Tax Act is without any jurisdiction and hence held liable to be set aside.
ITAT Mumbai order in DCIT vs Brandon & Co. (P) Ltd.: Set-off of carry-forward loss of capital gains in demerger. Analysis and conclusions provided.
Explore the JMD Corporation vs ITO case where ITAT Mumbai restricts profit element of purchases at 4%, examining allegations of bogus purchases for A.Y. 2011-12.
