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 : The Tribunal held that cash deposits during demonetisation cannot be treated as unexplained when backed by audited books, invoices...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that non-specification of the precise statutory charge under sections 270A(2) and 270A(9) violated principles o...
Income Tax : The Delhi ITAT held that institutions engaged in preservation of environment fall under a specific charitable limb under Section 2...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that CIT(A) cannot enhance income under Section 251 on matters not considered by the Assessing Officer during as...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore restored the Section 54F claim after noting that medical issues and portal difficulties prevented timely filing of ...
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 : Delhi ITAT allows Sanco Holding, a Norwegian company, to compute income from bareboat charter of seismic vessels under Article 21(...
Income Tax : Learn about hybrid hearing guidelines of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Indore Bench, effective from October 9, 2023, offeri...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that rural agricultural land situated beyond 8 kilometres from municipal limits cannot be taxed as a capital a...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi deleted a ₹45 lakh addition under Section 68 after finding that the assessee had furnished complete details of invest...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi restored a Section 69A addition after holding that the assessee failed to produce evidence supporting its claim that th...
Income Tax : ITAT Rajkot held that revision under section 263 was not sustainable where the Assessing Officer had already conducted extensive v...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that addition under Section 41(1) cannot be made without proving cessation of liability. The Tribunal found that f...
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...
Income Tax : Bhagyalaxmi Conclave Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) In the remand report, the AO clearly stated that notice u/s 143(2) of the Ac...
The Tribunal held that mere possession of cash during seizure does not establish ownership for section 69A. Where the source is explained and ownership lies elsewhere, addition in the carrier’s hands is unsustainable.
ITAT Mumbai held that section 70 of the Income Tax Act allows first setting off the short term capital loss against the non STT gains taxable at thirty percent, and then applying the balance against the STT gains taxable at fifteen percent. Accordingly, appeal stands allowed.
The Tribunal held that reassessment under section 147 fails when seized search material exists. The correct and exclusive route is section 153C, making the reopening jurisdictionally invalid.
The Tribunal held that delays caused by internal approvals from senior officials cannot justify late filing. Lack of due diligence by officials led to outright dismissal of the appeal.
The Tribunal ruled that taxing entire bank cash deposits under section 69A without examining business explanations is unsustainable. The reassessment was restored for de-novo adjudication with conditions.
The Tribunal noted that Form 26AS discrepancies were caused by contracts and TDS continuing in the proprietor’s PAN after business conversion. Since reconciliation was not properly examined, the issue was sent back for fresh adjudication.
ITAT held that invoking Rule 8D without recording dissatisfaction with the assessee’s own disallowance violates section 14A(2). Mechanical application of Rule 8D renders the disallowance legally unsustainable.
The Tribunal clarified that section 80G(2) applies to donor deductions, not trust registration. Since conditions under section 80G(5) were fulfilled, registration was directed to be granted.
The Tribunal ruled that issuing only three hearing notices does not satisfy principles of natural justice. The matter was restored for fresh adjudication with proper opportunity.
The Tribunal held that an assessment under section 153C cannot go beyond the material specified in the satisfaction note. Since additions were based on different material, the entire assessment was quashed.
