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...
Case study: JCIT vs. Ajay Sharma. Read NFAC introduction to the case & its findings on Rs. 1.95 crores addition on account of unexplained investment under Section 69 of Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chennai’s ruling in the case of Fathima Jewellers vs. DCIT clarifies that excess gold jewellery stock found during a survey isn’t unexplained investment under IT Act.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Pune deleted the penalty in the Jyoti Paper Udyog Ltd Vs. ACIT case due to non-production of Form No. 3CEB under Section 92E.
ITAT Pune directs reconsideration of an appeal by Gajanana Developers against disallowance of deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act. Find out more.
In a case of Vikram Dhirani vs. DCIT, ITAT Delhi rules in favor of the assessee, deleting the penalty under section 271AAA due to the lack of opportunity to explain undisclosed income source during search proceedings.
Neeraj Gas Movers successfully argues for the validity of a rectified partnership deed, leading to the approval of salary and interest claims by ITAT.
DCIT vs. Krishan Kumar case: ITAT Delhi dismisses appeal by the Department regarding share transaction, ruling it doesn’t fall under the CBDT Circular exception.
In the case of Shekhar Bharti vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi), the article explores how the valuation report was discredited, affecting the tax assessment.
In the Subba Raju Chekuri Vs. ITO case, ITAT Hyderabad remands matter due to the failure of the assessee to provide evidence for Section 54F deduction claim.
In an income tax penalty case, ITAT Chennai dismisses the appeal, upholding that advances received by Dr. M.N. Kumaresan constitute gifts and are exempt from penalty under section 271D.
