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...
ACIT Vs. Head Infotech India Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Hyderabad) Assessee hosts online games and when the customers make payments through banking Gateways by way of credit or debit card of the relevant banks ( which are referred to as Gateways) and while transferring money to the assessee’s account, banks invariably retain service charges. It is […]
DCIT Vs. Chitradurga District Co-Op. Central Bank Ltd. (ITAT Bangalore) If an assessee adopts the mercantile system of accounting and in his accounts he shows a particular income as accruing, whether that amount is really accrued or not is liable to bring the said income to tax. His accounts should reflect true and correct statement of affairs. […]
DCIT Vs Shree Venkatesh Associates (ITAT Pune) The issue of pro-rata deduction u/s. 80IB(10) for eligible units has been considered by the jurisdictional ITAT, Pune in case of Ramsukh Properties (supra) and M/s D.S. Kulkarni Developers Ltd (supra) and IT AT, Nagpur in case of AIR Developers(supra) and allowed such pro-rata deduction. The ITAT, Mumbai […]
Shri Bhuwan Goyal Vs DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh) Landmark Chandigarh ITAT order on Section 115BBE on investment made out of undisclosed business income held not to fall in Section 69 & 115BBE (AY 17-18). In the present case it is not in dispute that the assessee surrenderd the income of Rs. 3.64 Crores in the statement […]
Taaq Music Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) The law provides that, the fair market value may be determined with such method as may be prescribed or the fair market value can be determined to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer. The provision provides an Assessee two choices of adopting either NAV method or DCF […]
Tata Sky Limited Vs. CIT (ITAT Mumbai) The issue under consideration is whether the disallowance of expenditure under section 14A is justified if there is no exempt income? In the instant case, the assessee has invested in various investments which, yield exempt income. Further, the assessee has not made suo moto disallowance of expenditure incurred […]
Ravjibhai L. Kakadia Vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) The issue under consideration is whether the maturity value of the Keyman Insurance Policy is taxable under Income Tax Act and under which Head?
Sanjay Sharma Vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessing Officer has accepted not only he sales figures but has also accepted that total purchases. Under accounting principles, a liability can only be brought into account by a credit entry in the books of account in favour of the person to whom the money is payable’ Thus, there […]
Vishal Constructions Vs. ITO (ITAT Pune) We note that in the present appeal the assessee claimed deduction Rs.18,80,000/- u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act. The AO held that the assessee has violated the provisions of section 80IB(10) of the Act as built up area of shops and commercial establishments exceeded 5000 sq. ft. For such violation […]
Midland Credit Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT (ITAT Delhi) Assessee by way of additional ground has claimed deduction of cess on the ground that the same is not covered under section 40(a)(ii) of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay at Panaji bench in the case of Sesa Goa 423 ITR 426 […]
