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 ITAT Ahmedabad held that reassessment under Section 147 was invalid because the Assessing Officer reopened the case for fictit...
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 : 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...
ACIT Vs Hirapanna Jewellers (ITAT Visakhapatnam) In the instant case the assessee has established the sales with the bills and representing outgo of stocks. The sales were duly accounted for in the books of accounts and there were no abnormal profits. In spite of conducting the survey the AO did not find any defects in […]
Talera Automobiles Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dated 21-07-2017 passed by the CIT(A)-5, Pune in relation to the assessment year 2009-10. 2. The only issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of disallowance of foreign travel expenses amounting to Rs.9,29,041/-. 3. Briefly […]
GOCL Corporation Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) Learned counsel’s first and foremost argument is that a corporate guarantee is a shareholder’s activity which has been wrongly treated as an international transaction u/s.92B read with Explanation inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 with retrospective effect from 01-04-2002. He next sought to draw a distinction between the […]
Nutan Warehousing Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) The concept of `accrual of income’ needs to be considered in the hue of the ‘real income theory’. Where accrual of an income takes place but its realisation becomes impossible, such hypothetical income cannot be charged to tax. In the case of mercantile system of accounting, […]
Omkam developers Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) 1. The reasons recorded are based on suspicion, which is evident from the words used in reasons recorded, i.e., “it appears that assessee M/s Omkam Developers Ltd. has received bogus share capital/share premium to the tune of ₹ 1.93 Crores. 2. The Assessing Officer has just accepted the […]
DCIT Vs Saroj Kumar Poddar (ITAT Kolkata) Kolkata bench first of its kind of Interim order on the subject of endless adjournments by revenue on pretext of covid 19 and resultant pains to tax payer languishing for justice held remarkably as follows:- The Revenue is also raising strong objections, without any valid ground, for the […]
ITO Vs Nabinagar Power Generating Co. Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) No addition on account of interest income as same was inextricably linked with setting up of power plant and to be capitalized Conclusion: Since the work of construction of the power plant was under progress, interest incomes are also inextricably linked with the setting up […]
Sri Pradip Kumar Basu Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) It is observed that the long-term capital gain of Rs.6,14,674/- had arisen to the assessee as a result of residential property sold on 12.06.2013 and in order to claim exemption on account of long-term capital gain under section 54EC of the Act, the assessee was required to […]
Since there was no allegation by the departmental authorities that assessee had violated any of the conditions of the provisions of sections 11, 12 and 13, except, the allegation that assessee was a mutual concern and even applying the rule of consistency, assessee’s claim of exemption under section 11 had to be allowed.
AO had to confront assessee with the material collected behind the back of assessee, if he chosen to use the material against assessee and that he should provide assessee an opportunity of cross-examination. Not having done so made the evidence in question bad in law.
