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 Tribunal held that tax authorities cannot reject documentary evidence solely by labeling the explanation as an afterthought. P...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore dismissed the Revenue’s appeal after holding that the Assessing Officer failed to provide adequate reasons for de...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) should not be decided before disposal of the related quantum appe...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that two sale deeds represented the same transaction because one was merely an amendment correcting a survey num...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that CPC cannot suo motu reclassify an apartment owners association as a co-operative society while processing...
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...
Smt. Preeti Rathi Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) The first issue raised herein is against not allowing deduction towards brokerage of Rs.80,000/- paid by the assessee at the time of purchase of the property in the computation of capital gain towards. The claim of the assessee is that she paid a sum of Rs.80,000/- as brokerage […]
Maheshwari Woods Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) Amended provisions of section 43B as well as 36(1)(va) of the I.T.Act are not applicable for the assessment years under consideration as these are applicable from assessment year 2021-2022. By following the binding decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. […]
In the instant case, there is no relation whatsoever between the interest expenditure from a mortgaged loan and the payment received for rendering certain services. Advancing interest free loans to the employer company cannot be a ground for claiming deduction of interest expenditure from the salary income received from it.
Hapur Pilkhuwa Development Authority Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Learned CIT(A) has not allowed the benefit of excess utilization of earlier years, claimed by the assessee by raising additional ground. Ld. AR for the assessee contended that this issue is also covered in favour of the assessee by the order passed by coordinate Bench of Tribunal […]
No reason is assigned for not following Rule of Consistency. The Revenue is under legal obligation to be consistent in its approach regarding taxability of any item. It cannot be purely on the whims and fancies of the Assessing Officer.
ACIT Vs Vinay Girish Bajpai (ITAT Mumbai) Assessee claimed that he has complied with all the requirements of claiming exemption/deduction under section 54 of the IT Act. He submitted that assessee has made the payment to the builder within the stipulated time. There was some issue of obtaining the completion certificate by the builder. Hence, […]
During the year under consideration also the assessee could not substantiate with relevant evidences that these expenses were related to loan syndication fees and the same was claimed as Investment Advisory Services without any break up of the detail of loan advances arranged by these two parties.
Centum Electronics Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) Hon’ble Supreme Court, while deciding the identical issue in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd held that assessment order passed on a nonexistent entity is without jurisdiction and deserves to be set aside. Fact of the case before the Hon’ble Supreme Court clearly shows that the notice […]
Sameer Granites Pvt.Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) In the instant case, the assessee had submitted that the orders passed u/s 200A of the Act were never served on the assessee physically or otherwise. It was stated that intimation u/s 200A downloaded from the office of the Assessing Officer by the Tax Professional, was not communicated […]
In this case, assessee is engaged in manufacturing of automobile components and let out 50% of its factory building on lease and earned rental income. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly held the rental income as income under the head house property. Having the rental income held as income under the head house property, the assessee is not eligible for claim of depreciation on the let out portion.
