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...
Jain Shwetamber Murtipujak Sukrat Fund Kaoda Committee Vs. CIT (ITAT Indore) On perusal of the record we find that the assessee trust was incorporated in the year 1945 and even in the Permanent Account Number (PAN) allotted by the Income Tax Department the date of incorporation of the trust is 16.4.1945. The assessee has claimed […]
DCIT Vs Manav Realty (ITAT Pune) It is evident from the reasons recorded by the AO that the initiation of reassessment proceedings was premised on the fact that the commencement took place at a date in variance with the one stated by the assessee in the original assessment proceedings. The ld. CIT(A) has aptly recorded […]
ACIT Vs Mattel Toys (India) Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the A.Yrs.2008-09 and 2009-10 vide order dated 08/07/2016 already held that AMP expenditure is not an international transaction and hence, no ALP adjustment could be made thereon. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case, we […]
Rashmi Jalan Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) Penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271AAB is bad in law as the showcause notice issued by the Assessing Officer does not specify the charge/s against the assessee for levy of penalty, as required by law. Thus, on this ground, the penalty is quashed. Even otherwise, […]
DCIT Vs. ICICI Bank Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) The issue under consideration is whether the CIT(A) is correct in deleting the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) on the disallowance of expenses made u/s.35D? ITAT states that, the assessee claimed deduction of preliminary expenses u/s 35D which was rejected by Ld.AO in terms of decision of Hon’ble Madras […]
Orion Property Management Services Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITAT Bangalore) The issue under consideration is whether CIT(A) is correct in making addition of Sponsorship and Promotional income by reducing it from marketing cost? In the instant case, the marketing income has been considered under the head marketing cost and net of expenses is debited to P&L […]
Balaji Telefilms Limited Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) The issue under consideration is whether the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) without specifying the limb will be sustain under law? ITAT states that, it has been held by Hon’ble Court that the notice would have to specifically state the ground mentioned in Section 271(1)(c) of the Act namely […]
DCIT Vs. Coffee Day Global Ltd. (ITAT Bangalore) The issue under consideration is whether foreign exchange fluctuations are allowed as revenue expense u/s 37 of Income Tax Act? ITAT states that, the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 312 ITR 254 had already held that the actual […]
Sree Lakshmi Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) We have already examined the legal position with regard to validity of initiation of proceedings u/s. 153C of the Act de hors incriminating material found in the course of search which belong or relate to the assessee. Admittedly, no such incriminating material was found in respect of any of […]
It is for the assessee to examine whether or not in the light of the applicable legal provisions and the precise factual position the provisions of the IT Act are beneficial to him or that of the applicable DTAA.
