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...
Satyabhama Avadhanula Karimnagar Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) I find the Assessing Officer on the basis of inquiry conducted u/s 131(1)(d) made addition of Rs.22.00 lakhs being unexplained cash found from the possession of the assessee and made addition of the same u/s 69A rws 115BBE of the I.T. Act. I find the learned CIT (A) […]
Vedika Realty Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) It is well settled law, the mere filing of appeal is not sufficient until and unless, it is effectively pursued and prosecuted. From the record, orders passed by the authorities below specifically by the Ld. Commissioners and the facts of the case, the conduct of the Assessee […]
NBK Infrastructure P. Ltd Vs JCIT (ITAT Delhi) The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Hari Gopal Singh Vs. CIT 258 ITR 85 held that when the additions are made on estimate basis that by itself does not lead to the conclusion that the assessee either concealed the particulars of his […]
Adilakshmi Srungavarapu Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam) Admitted facts are that the husband of the assessee in order to retain the property got the property registered in the assessee’s name and has repaid the loans borrowed by him by sale of gold jewellery and personal savings of the assessee. We also find merit in the argument […]
Spinks Impex Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Hon’ble Apex court in the matter of PCIT vs. Aarham Softronics [2019] 102 com 343 (SC), pronounced on 20-02-2019. Wherein, it was held an assessee availing exemption of 100% tax on setting up of a new industry, which is admissible for 5 years, and either on the expiry of […]
Liladevi Dokania Vs ITO (ITAT Surat) It is evidently clear that assessee received the rent income, and the Tenant (Deductor) has deducted TDS but has not deposited the TDS so deducted into the Central Government Account. Considering these facts, we note that issue under consideration is no longer res integra. The Hon`ble High Court of […]
Jaykumar Mangilal Nagori Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) It is indisputable that the assessee could not lead any evidence to demonstrate that the user of the car was restricted only to business purposes and did not percolate for personal use. Even the auditor has also mentioned that the personal element in vehicle expenses could not be […]
R R M Trading Co. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) ITAT find that AO has restricted the payment of interest to the related parties @ 18% to 12% on the ground that it is excessive and unreasonable looking to the fact that assessee has paid interest to the partners @ 12% which is in accordance with […]
Joharimal High School Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack) Undisputedly rather admittedly, the assessee does not enjoy registration u/s.12AA of the Act and as per e-return filed before the Bench, as per column 3, the assessee has shown receipt of income of Rs.97,10,521/- and as per column 4(i), amount applied during the previous year or expenditure incurred […]
Sharda Educational Trust Vs JCIT (ITAT Delhi) The Bench is of firm view that the foundation of issuing show cause notice for penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, being crumbled by a verdict of this Tribunal, by deletion of additions, the penalty order alone cannot stand by its own against the assessee. Reliance in this […]
