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 : Bangalore ITAT restored Section 80P issues for fresh examination and deleted certain disallowances after finding inadequate reason...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi upheld deletion of PF/ESI disallowance, holding the issue was debatable when the Section 143(1) intimation was issued....
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad allowed Section 87A rebate on tax under Section 112 for AY 2024-25 where total income was below ₹7 lakh and direc...
Income Tax : ITAT remanded taxation of software and SaaS receipts as FTS for fresh examination and directed 10% DTAA rate if receipts are ultim...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi deleted the Section 54/54F disallowance, accepted the registered valuer’s FMV as on 01.04.2001, and rejected the AO...
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...
AO, accordingly, took the view that each of the unit is separate house. Since deduction u/s 54F of the Act is not permitted, if the assessee is having more than one house property, the AO rejected the claim for deduction u/s 54F of the Act.
During the course of assessments the Assessing Officer found that the assessee claimed expenseunder the head ‘Assistance to Law Students’, and when asked, submitted that the assistance paid to law students Diksha Sharma and Krishna Prasad K. V. at Oxford is the justification for such claim.
Shri Praveen Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) As per facts of the present case, the assessee was student and studying for said period in Birla Institute of Technology as a regular student of M.Sc. Animation and Design and was tenant of Shri Abhishek Agarwal, who was into business of real estate in name and style […]
It is necessary to bring on record, to be taken care of by the CBDT, that present appeal has been filed just to generate unnecessary litigation without examining well-reasoned findings returned by the ld. CIT (A) which can be curtailed if proper scrutiny/vetting by the senior officers, who are at the helms of the affairs, is made before approving any case for filing appeal before a higher forum.
Addition of sum paid to Tata Sons Limited towards subscription paid for Brand Equity and Business Promotion Agreement was not justified as the said payment was made annually on a recurring basis for business purpose and the same was allowable as a revenue expense.
Luxe Trading And Holding (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) From a perusal of the reasons, it is seen that the notice u/s. 148 of the Act has been issued mechanically without application of mind and the satisfaction by the Assessing Officer is only the borrowed satisfaction of the Investigation Wing. The Assessing Officer, […]
Bapujibuwa Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit VS JCIT (ITAT Pune) The expression ‘reasonable cause’ has to be considered pragmatically and if the facts of the present case are examined keeping this legislative spirit in mind, we find that there were enough circumstances to show that the assessee company had acquired bona-fide belief that its activities […]
Karan Sharma Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) The assessee has explained that Rs.92,54,462 is out of previous withdrawals and sale of garments and pleaded that it is to be excluded from the taxation. The assessee has not furnished any evidence to establish the nexus between the earlier withdrawals and deposits into various bank accounts. In such […]
D.S. Suresh vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) In the present case, the addition is based on the diary jottings found during the course of search action in the case of RNSIL on 16.02.2012. We have carefully gone through the diary jottings recorded earlier part of this order. It contains the entry No.5 – MLA Tarikere Rs.27 […]
Once the books of account of assessee were rejected for want of supporting vouchers and details then the income of assessee was required to be estimated thus, there were no error or illegality in the impugned order of CIT(A) in estimating the income of assessee by applying N.P. at 1% which was a reasonable and justified.
