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 as no adjustment on transfer pricing issue would subsist and therefore there is no question of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act on such addition.
Sh. Balwinder Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Amritsar) Ld. A.O cannot blow hot and cold at the same time by partly rejecting the books of accounts and partly accepted the books of accounts, which is bad-in-law. If the AO rejected the books of accounts, then he can’t rely on the same books of accounts for opening […]
Requirement to allow TDS credit on Salary is only of amount of tax deducted at source & not getting deposited with Government after deduction.
LLP is to be treated as a firm under Income Tax Act, 1961 and a firm can be a partner in other partnership firms therefore, LLP is eligible to exemption under Section 10(2A) on share of profit received from other partnership firms.
Victory for Sanjay Duggal as ITAT Delhi quashes assessments under 153A, nullifying penalties. Learn why the penalty orders couldn’t survive. Decided in favor of the assessee.
ITAT Rajkot held that the claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Act cannot be denied only on the basis that the assessee did not file its return of income within due date u/s 139(1) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition merely on the basis of seized paper which is neither signed nor dated, without any corroborative evidence, is untenable in law.
ITAT Delhi held that the centralised services fee received by the assessee cannot be treated as FTS under Article 12 of the India-Singapore tax treaty, hence not taxable in India.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the disallowances made under section 14A read with rule 8D cannot be the subject matter of disallowances while determining the net profit u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act.
Higher rate of tax was prescribed in section 115BBE through an amendment made vide Taxation Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 2016 and the said amendment received assent of the President of India on 15.12.2016 and therefore the amendment shall apply prospectively w.e.f. 15.12.2016 and not retrospectively.
