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 Hyderabad held that AO has neither made any enquiry nor asked any questions to the assessee nor any information was called for. Therefore, the order passed by AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue within the meaning of section 263 of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that reopening of assessment was undertaken by AO without application of mind on complete incorrect assumption of fact that no return of income was filed for the relevant Assessment year and hence said reopening of assessment is invalid.
ITAT Kolkata held that advance given in relation to business transaction for setting up hospital project which was abandoned, the said advance is irrecoverable and hence allowable as revenue expenditure.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the Assessing Officer is required to pass the assessment order within the time limit prescribed under section 153(1) of the Income Tax Act and hence any order passed belatedly is unsustainable in law.
ITAT Delhi held that imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act on the mere allegation that assessee failed to justify the revenue nature of the expenditure is unsustainable as penalty proceedings are independent of assessment proceedings.
ITAT Kolkata held that non-mentioning of the Document Identification Number (DIN) on the body of the order makes the order as invalid and deemed to have never been issued.
ITAT Mumbai held that any order passed by the TPO beyond a period of limitation as prescribed under the provisions of section 92CA(3A) of the Income Tax Act is bad in law.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that there was delay in filing statement in Form 24Q/ 26Q due to heavy loss incurred by assessee. However, the same was filed before issuance of show cause notice and late payment of TDS was done along with interest. Hence, it shows that there was no mala fide intention on the part of the assessee for late filing of TDS return and hence penalty not leviable.
ITAT Mumbai held that in terms of non- obstinate clause used in section 80IA(2A), deduction for telecommunication services is available in respect of profits of eligible business and is not restricted to profits derived from eligible business as mentioned in section 80IA(1) of the Act.
ITAT Delhi held that revenue received towards to distribute the channel to cable operators, DTH operators, hotels, institutions etc. in India is not in the nature of royalty and hence addition not sustainable.
