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 : ITAT Special Bench held that omission of scrutiny category in a Section 143(2) notice is a procedural defect curable under Section...
Income Tax : ITAT held section 35D(2)(c) applies only to companies and upheld disallowance of REIT's claim for IPO and listing expense amortisa...
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 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 Bangalore held disputed salary is taxable only if it became due and remanded the matter to verify the employment terms and em...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi deleted the section 69A addition of ₹33.50 lakh after holding the intercepted cash formed part of the disclosed prope...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi deleted Section 270A penalty as notices lacked specific Section 270A(9) charge and the expenditure claim involved a deb...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore restored six Section 153A search assessment appeals to the AO, subject to ₹50,000 cost per appeal for repeated no...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore deleted a Section 270A penalty as the notice and penalty order failed to specify the exact statutory limb of under-...
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...
Addl. CIT Vs Jasper Infotech Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Expenses w.r.t promotion for brand ‘Snapdeal’ are revenue in nature The Hon’ble Delhi Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi v. M/S Jasper Infotech Private Limited [ITA No 2605/Del/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-2013) dated November 10, 2021] held that expenses involved for […]
Shriram Retail Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai) Forfeiture of convertible warrant would result into extinguishment of the right of the assessee to obtain a share. A share in a company is nothing but share in the ownership of the company. While the right of the assessee to share in the ownership of the […]
V.K. Natha co-operative Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the issue involved in these appeals related to treatment of interest received by co-operative societies from other co-operative societies including cooperative bank under section 80P(2)(d). He submitted that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision […]
Court has held that beyond a period of 4 years, retrospective amendment u/s 115JB of the Act could not be a ground for reassessment. Such legal proposition requires no authority of law.
I.T.O. Vs Bhagchand Jain (ITAT Jaipur) Disallowance of depreciation on vehicles is also not warranted with the facts and merits of the case as depreciation being a statutory allowance and hence cannot be restricted on the basis of personal use as has been held by Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in ITA no. 373/JP/2002 in […]
Vijay D. Patel Vs CIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) It is clear that post amendment to section 271(1)(c) w.e.f. 1-4-2002 authorizing the commissioner also initiate penalty u/s 271(1)(c), the CIT still cannot direct the Assessing Officer to initiate penalty proceedings while exercising his revisionary power u/s. 263 of the act. The decision of the Jurisdictional High Court […]
Randox Laboratories India Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) The core issue arising for consideration is, whether the international transaction relating to purchase of reagents, spares, consumables from the AE is a simple trading activity, hence, can be benchmarked under RPM. Before we advert to the core issue, it is necessary to understand the activities […]
In our opinion, non submission of section 44AB report in cases like this does not render the assessee’s claim of a lower profit void ab initio. Failure to comply with section 44AB has to be dealt with under the provisions of section 271B. Here, the exposition emanating out of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court decision and the Tribunal decision cited supra are germane. Just that initial assessment has been done u/s 143(1), the Revenue cannot invoke provisions of re-assessment on any ground they can pick up from thin air. The Revenue can also not interpolate consequences of no compliance of provisions of the Act other than what has been expressly provided in the statute.”
R.S. Steel Manufacturers Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) In this case Ld. CIT(A), it appears presumed that that the VAT receivable was very much available for set off as per the books of the assessee and as opposed to that claimed by it that it was not available for set off. We find that this finding […]
We hold that there is no question of treating the amount withdrawn by the assessee as partner from the partnership firm namely M/s SKA Enterprises in the nature of loan and advance and treat it as deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. None of the ingredients of section 2(22)(e) stand satisfied in the instant case.
