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 deleted estimated brokerage additions based on inquiry registers and loose papers, holding that no corroborative ev...
Service Tax : Chhattisgarh HC upheld CESTATs order restricting service tax demand to the normal period under Section 73(1), finding the dispute ...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad deleted Section 69A addition as cash deposits were already accepted as business turnover under Section 44AD, avoidi...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai remanded additions under normal provisions and Section 115JB after observing that provision write-back and security de...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi directed exclusion of Australian salary from Indian taxable income under Article 15 of the India-Australia DTAA and den...
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...
ITAT Delhi held that that expenditure incurred between setting up and commencement of business could not have been capitalized and was to be allowed as business expenditure.
ITAT Pune held that as the assessee failed to establish why the shops were sold at loss to the partners and interest persons, principle of fraud squarely gets applicable. Accordingly, disallowance of loss duly justified.
ITAT Jaipur rules in favor of Shri Deepak Mata, deleting penalties under Sections 271E and 271D for loan transactions below Rs.20,000 threshold.
CIT(E)’s order is also a non-speaking one to this extent we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s substantive grievance back to the very authority for appropriate adjudication as per law
Filing of Form No. 67 under Rules 128 of Income Tax Rules is a procedural requirement, therefore, is a directory in nature, non-compliance thereof does not disentitled assessee in claiming Foreign Tax Credit (FTC)
If in the initial year of claim the depreciation, is allowed, the claim cannot be disturbed in the subsequent years
Assessee should be allowed benefit of deduction under section 54B of Act since purchase in new property has been made out of advances received towards sale of agricultural properties held by assessee.
ITAT Chennai rules in favor of First STP Pvt. Ltd., restoring matters to CIT(A) and AO for fresh adjudication due to missed opportunities and severe stress.
ITAT held that assessment order is bad in law as assessing authority passed order u/s 143(3) without issuing mandatory notice u/s 143(2)
Assessee must be informed of grounds of penalty proceedings through statutory notice and an omnibus notice suffers from vice of vagueness
