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 held sections 234B and 234C interest must be excluded from tax effect, dismissing the Revenue's appeal as below the CB...
Income Tax : Mumbai ITAT deleted a ₹6.50 lakh section 68 addition, holding repayment of an earlier bank-transferred loan cannot be treated as...
Income Tax : ITAT Bengaluru deleted ad hoc commission and interest disallowances, holding Section 40A(2)(b) inapplicable to interest paid to a ...
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 : 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...
The issue under consideration is whether the assessee is correct in stating that cognizance taken under section 153A of the Act is illegal at the end of the A.O.?
DCIT Vs Sheth & Sura Engineers Private Ltd. (ITAT Pune) It is an undisputed fact that the entire turnover of the assessee is exclusively from Government Department and the said turnover has not been disputed by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer has also not considered the debtors of other divisions and only considered debtors […]
Galax E Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) The revenue is assailing the decision of Ld DRP in holding that the gain/loss arising on account of fluctuation in foreign exchange is operating income/expenses. We notice that the Ld DRP has followed the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the case of Sap Labs […]
CIT Vs Dozco Infratech Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata) Assessee shows that depreciation claimed by the Assessee @ 30% on Excavators, Bull dozers and Wheel Loaders has been rightly claimed and should be allowed in full as against @ 15% allowed by the Assessing Officer. Learned departmental representative vehemently contended during the course of hearing that […]
Urmin Marketing P.Ltd. Now known as Unicorn Packaging LLP Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) Scheme of the amalgamation can be approved under the provisions of section 2(1B) of the Act where shareholders holding not less than 75% in the value of shares of the amalgamating company become the shareholders of the amalgamated […]
The issue under consideration is whether the disallowance u/s 14A can exceed the amount of exempt income? In the light of the order of M/s.Century Real Estate Holdings Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (supra), ITAT hold that the disallowance u/s 14A of the I.T.Act cannot exceed the exempt income.
K. Hemalatha Vs ACIT (ITAT Chennai) It is an admitted fact that against the assessment order, the assessee filed a manual appeal on 03.05.2016, which is well within the time provided under the Act. On perusal of the appellate order, we find that when the appeal was manually filed on 03.05.2016, no defect notice was […]
Noida Cyber Park Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Section 50C(1) of the Act, in so far as it is relevant for our purpose, prescribes that where the sale consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset, being ‘land or building or both‘, is less than […]
Assessing Officer has taken into consideration the facts and estimated the profit taking into deposits in the bank accounts. Thereafter, there were no new facts before the Assessing Officer which could justify the reopening. On these facts, it was nothing more than change of mind by the Assessing Officer, and a reopening of assessment on the basis of change of opinion, in view of Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in Kelvinator’s case (supra), is not permissible in law.
Amount paid for international freight logistic support services and Global Account Management (GAM) expenses by assessee-foreign company to Indian company could not be treated as Technical Services or Fee for Included Services (FIS) and also could not be taxed under section 9(1)(i) as no income had accrued or arised from the business connection abroad in India
