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 Delhi held that penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act not imposable as reasonable cause shown for non-furnishing of consent form sought by AO.
ITAT Pune rules that fee for default in TDS statement under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act applies only after June 1, 2015.
ITAT Hyderabad held that in absence of any substantial proceeding or collateral proceedings pending before AO, AO was right in not entertaining the application for rectification filed by the assessee.
ITAT Pune held that it is settled legal position that interest on (Non-Performing Assets) NPAs cannot be taxed on accrual basis.
ITAT Delhi held that conditions for the eligibility of claim u/s 80IC in the case of a new industrial undertaking stands satisfied as new firm acquired new plant & machinery which was not previously used.
ITAT Delhi held that considering the bonafide and genuine transaction, reasonable cause in terms of section 273B of the Act, exist in the case of the assessee for not complying with the provision of section 269SS and 269T, and therefore, penalty u/s 271D and 271E not leviable.
ITAT Mumbai held that as per paragraph 3.2 of the Instruction no. 3/2016 dated 10th March 2016, cases selected for scrutiny on a TP risk parameter has to be referred to TPO after obtaining approval from PCIT/ CIT. Non-complying with the instruction renders the order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.
ITAT Delhi held that the assessee has option to determine the method of valuation and the AO has no power to reject the method resorted by the assessee as no infraction of methodology has been brought out by the AO.
ITAT Kolkata ruled in Mahendra Kumar Parakh vs. ITO that cash deposit during demonetization was from past savings, directing AO to delete the addition of Rs. 2,50,000.
In Hira Lal Kadlabju vs. ACIT, ITAT Amritsar remits the case back to the assessing officer as the ownership of seized cash remains undecided pending High Court determination.
