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 Delhi deleted additions under section 41(1) and held that non-response to notices alone could not render supported sundry c...
Income Tax : ITAT held that omission in Form 3CD fell within section 273B reasonable cause, deleted the penalty, and allowed the assessee's app...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai remanded the Section 56(2)(vii)(b) addition, directing the AO to adopt the stamp duty value as on the agreement date ...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune allowed deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) on ₹9.12 lakh interest and dividend earned from co-operative banks and partl...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai restricted the Section 69A addition to peak credit in undisclosed bank accounts and directed taxation at 30% instead ...
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...
DCIT Vs Shri Rajamannar Thennati (ITAT Ahmedabad) The assessee was employed with Sun Pharma Advance Research Co. Ltd. as whole time director of the company with maximum salary of Rs. 3.5 crores as per the resolution passed in the annual general meeting of the company dated 31st July, 2012. Since there was limit for payment […]
No transfer pricing addition in respect of international transaction of payment of Regional Service Charges pertaining to five intra-group services could be made because even if presume that the comparable uncontrolled transaction was at zero mark-up, still the value of the international transaction was within the notified tolerance range.
Paschimanchal Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) AO noticed that assessee had made assessment of electricity duty of Rs. 5,52,98,00,000/- of which Rs. 3,44,22,00,000/- was adjusted from the subsidy and the balance amount of Rs.2,08,76,00,000/-was not paid by the assessee before filing the return of income. Assessee was asked to justify as to […]
DCIT Vs Rajamannar Thennati (ITAT Ahmedabad) The assessee was employed with Sun Pharma Advance Research Co. Ltd. as whole time director of the company with maximum salary of Rs. 3.5 crores as per the resolution passed in the annual general meeting of the company dated 31st July, 2012. Since there was limit for payment of […]
The issue under consideration is whether the disallowance made by AO u/s 14A is justified in law? In view of the fact that no proper satisfaction was recorded, in our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer did not acquire any valid jurisdiction for computing disallowance u/s 14A.
The issue under consideration is whether DRP is correct in considering the Liaison Office (LO) and Land Earth Station (‘LES’) constitutes a permanent establishment (PE) in India?
The issue under consideration is whether disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) made by AO forming an opinion that interest bearing funds were withdrawn from the firm being capital withdrawn by the partners and interest free advances is justified in law?
Standard Chartered Grindlays Bank Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) The assessee is a non-resident banking company which carries on the business of banking and other related activities through its branches in India in accordance with the provisions of Banking Regulation Act, 1949. During the year, Indian Permanent Establishment (in short PE) of the assessee bank in […]
Disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D could not exceed tax free income earned by assessee. Therefore, AO was directed to restrict disallowance made on account of the common administrative expenses to the amount of exempt dividend income actually earned by the assessee during the year under consideration.
The issue under consideration is whether the CIT(A) is correct in disallowing the provision for warranty of mobile phone merely on the basis of improvement in technology is justified in law?
