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 : Article examines whether the MLI Principal Purpose Test has domestic effect under Section 90(1) following Nestlé SA and Sky High ...
Corporate Law : The article argues that failure to comply before the AO or CIT(A) can lead to adverse assessments, as higher forums generally cann...
Income Tax : ITAT held that Section 54 exemption must be examined separately for each residential house sold. Aggregating gains from multiple t...
Income Tax : ITAT held that delayed filing of Form 10B cannot defeat Section 11 exemption if the audit report is available before processing un...
Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore restored the appeal after holding that mere upload of an order on the ITBA portal is not valid service under Sectio...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held Section 2(47)(v) inapplicable as the JDA did not satisfy Section 53A conditions, deleting capital gains for AY...
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 : ITAT Ahmedabad allowed Section 54F deduction, holding that completion certificate was not required where evidence established cons...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata upheld deletion of business expenditure disallowance, holding that nil sales did not establish business closure and r...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai deleted the addition under Section 69 holding that mere time gap between cash withdrawal and redeposit cannot justify...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata held that an assessment under Section 143(3) is void where the mandatory notice under Section 143(2) was issued by an...
Income Tax : ITAT Jabalpur deleted Section 270A penalty, holding that an excess Section 80G deduction claim was a bona fide mistake and not mis...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune allowed rectification under Section 254(2), correcting factual errors and granting Section 54EC deduction of ₹1 crore ...
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...
Ishwarbhai Madhavlal Patel-HUF Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) In the present case, the Karta of HUF having expired in the year 2021 itself when this information was first provided and since then revised Form No. 36 in the name of the legal-heirs or representative of the deceased-assessee is not be filed as provided in Rule 26 […]
Section 68 cannot be invoked if Assessee not required to maintain books of account. Section 115BBE comes into operation only in case of income referred in Section 68/69/69A/69B/69C and 69D
No TDS deduction at source on Salary is contemplated under Section 192 in cases where a payment towards salary has accrued but is not made.
Without pointing out specific defects in documents furnished, disallowance on ad-hoc basis for failure to furnish all documentary evidence is unacceptable
ITAT held that once additions been made under Black Money Act the same addition cannot be made under Income Tax Act on the same set of facts
Addition has been made as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act which is incorrect and against the provision of Act as the said explanation deals with the disallowance and addition of expenditure the source whereof is not explained by the assessee.
Basic fact that assessee is not eligible for filing return of income was not taken into account and therefore, there was no application of mind while recording reasons for reopening.
It goes without saying that in the absence of enabling powers, no disallowance can be made. As such, enabling provisions being absent, the CPC did not have the jurisdiction to make the disallowance in question, in the order u/s 143 (1) of the Act.
If depreciation as per Income Tax Act is taken into account then the accumulated profits of the assessee would be working out to be in negative meaning thereby that there are no accumulated profits for Section 2(22)(e)
Mahesh Agarwal Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) The crux of the issue is that the assessee has filed the appeal manually but simultaneously not filed the appeal electronically. Hence, ld. CIT(A) treated the manual appeal filed by the assessee as non est and dismissed the same. Assessee had already filed the appeal in paper form, however […]
