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...
The issue under consideration is whether it is correct to treat the Subscription fees received from subscribers on sale of online product as Royalty income under Income Tax Act?
Santosh Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) Tribunal has considered the guidance note of ICAI in respect of the tax audit U/s 44AB of the Act wherein the turnover or gross receipt in respect of speculative transactions has been considered as some total of positive and negative outcome of the speculative transactions. This Tribunal in a […]
The issue under consideration is whether CIT(A) is correct in treating the interest from Fixed deposits made in connection with Contract business as income from ‘Other sources’ in place of income from ‘Business’?
The issue under consideration is whether the Payment Gateway facilities provided by banks are liable for TDS provisions?
According to ITAT, the claim of assessee on account of Pay anomaly of employee crystallized during the year should have been accepted and he, therefore, granted relief to the assessee. Further, they observed that in the order dated 24.12.2009 for assessment year 2006-07 in assessee’s own case, the Tribunal decided that the liability crystallized during the year has to be allowed. Hence, now they do not find anything improper in the approach of the CIT(A) to allow the expenses in respect of which the liability crystallized during the year.
The issue under consideration is regarding application of Stay of Demand in front of Tribunal, whether the amendment done by Finance Act, 2020 in Section 254 will be applicable in present case?
The issue under consideration is whether the addition made by AO by considering the transaction entered by the assessee as bogus transactions are justified in law?
Whether the CIT(A) is correct in restricting the addition u/s 69C for bogus purchases to 12.5% against the total purchase disallowance made by AO?
Shri Suresh Kumar Agarwal Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) ITAT deleted addition made u/s 68 for alleged bogus LTCG of Rs.56,43,084/- on merits holding that Ld AO failed to bring any cogent material in addition to report of Directorate of Investigation Kolkata about Jamakharchi /Penny stock companies and convert its reasons into a fact , thereby […]
1. Can the assessee treat shares held in subsidiary company, which is ordered to be wound up, as trading loss? 2. Whether the amount transferred to the reserve fund account as per the provisions of section 67 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1962, was diversion of income at source by overriding title or could such transfer be treated as business expenditure deductible either under section 28 or section 37?
