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 : Mumbai ITAT condoned a 917-day delay and directed that bogus purchase addition be limited to the gross profit element where sales ...
Income Tax : Mumbai ITAT restored section 12AB registration and 80G approval applications for fresh adjudication after finding relevant aspects...
Income Tax : Bengaluru ITAT restored the matter to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on reassessment and section 80P issues after setting aside the...
Income Tax : Bengaluru ITAT allowed deduction of ₹1.475 crore success fee under section 48(i), holding advisory services for share divestment...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi deleted additions under section 41(1) and held that non-response to notices alone could not render supported sundry c...
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...
Shree Nirmal Commercial Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) At the outset, the Ld. Representative of the assessee has argued that the assessee was not the owner of the property, therefore, the expenses are not liable to be capitalized in any manner. It is also argued that the assessee is the lease-holder and only claiming the […]
IDBI Bank Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) During the Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10, the taxpayer made provision for expenses under the head ‘repairs and maintenance’ amounting to Rs. 6 million on which tax was not deducted at source. The taxpayer also made provision for ‘operation and maintenance charges’ amounting to Rs.7 million on which tax […]
R.N. Shetty Trust Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) As per Section 153C of the Act, the Assessing Officer of searched person shall proceed against such other person on reaching satisfaction that any undisclosed income belonging to such other person over whom he has no jurisdiction then he has to transmit the seized material to the Assessing […]
DCIT Vs NLC India Ltd. (ITAT Chennai) The main objection of the AO is that the new unit started cannot be considered as separate undertaking because it is using the same manufacturing technology and the finished goods are also the same, i.e., power. The new unit, i.e., unit TPS-I Expansion is nothing but the expansion […]
ACIT Vs. M/s GTM Builders & Promoters Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) As per accounting standards AS-7, the purchases and working progress have to be reconciled along with architect report. The AO has not rejected the books of accounts and accepted the book profits while making the addition. The Assessing Officer’s observation that none of the […]
FIH India Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai) There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee has written off input Service Tax during the impugned financial year relevant to assessment year 2010-11. But, the dispute is with regard to deductibility of input service tax. The AO has disputed deduction claimed by […]
The assessee is an individual, who is an employee of HDFC Bank Limited, Mumbai, and currently on deputation to HDFC Bank Representative Office in Dubai. The status of the assessee is of the non-resident.
Sai Mirra Innopharm Private Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) On perusal of details filed by the assessee, we find that the assessee has entered into a contract manufacturing agreement with Dr.Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., for a period of 10 years for manufacturing of drugs as per the specification provided by the principals, but the know-how required […]
Dodla International Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Chennai) ITAT held that license fee received by the assessee for licensing a fully furnished hotel along with license to run the hotel is a business receipt, which is assessable under the head ‘income from business or profession’ but not a rental income, which is assessable under the head […]
Power Company of Karnataka Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) Conclusion: Since there were internal financial arrangements made by assessee with ESCOMs to fund the expenditure, therefore, this could not disentitle assessee to claim expenditure in accordance with the Act and the income of assessee had to be computed under the provisions of the Act without […]
