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 : 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 held that delayed filing of Form 10B cannot defeat Section 11 exemption if the audit report is available before processing un...
Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
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 : Delhi ITAT allows Sanco Holding, a Norwegian company, to compute income from bareboat charter of seismic vessels under Article 21(...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad upheld the excess cash addition and Section 153D approval, while remanding the stock shortage addition for fresh ex...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad deleted a Section 69 addition after finding the mother's identity, funds and gift confirmation established the sour...
Income Tax : Chennai ITAT deleted the Section 271D penalty, holding temporary cash received to demonstrate visa funds was not a loan attracting...
Income Tax : Chennai ITAT upheld deletion of a Section 69A addition, holding that cash withdrawals from the assessee's own bank account could n...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune upheld deletion of ₹1.14 crore Section 69C addition as it was based only on third-party statements without corroborati...
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...
Alleged additions for suppressed sales, disallowances, and capital gains were rendered void once the revision order was quashed. The case underscores the doctrine of consequential invalidity.
ITAT Pune held that penalty not leviable under section 270A of the Income Tax Act since show cause notice failed to specify the applicable limb u/s. 270A(9) under which the penalty was imposed. Accordingly, penalty is quashed and appeal is allowed.
The ITAT held that assessments framed beyond the permissible ten-year block under Section 153C are without jurisdiction. Since the satisfaction note fixed the deemed search year later, earlier years were invalidly assessed.
The Tribunal ruled that absence of DIN on Section 143(2) notices vitiates jurisdiction under Section 147. All reassessment orders were quashed as legally unsustainable.
The Tribunal directed normal taxation, holding that Section 115BBE could not be invoked for the year involved. This reinforces the prospective operation of the higher tax regime.
The Tribunal held that a notice under Section 143(2) issued by a non-jurisdictional officer vitiates the entire assessment. In the absence of a valid jurisdictional transfer, the reassessment was declared non-est in law.
The ruling confirms that Section 14A cannot be invoked mechanically without actual expenditure linked to exempt income. Growth mutual funds earning taxable gains fall outside its scope.
The Tribunal held that compensation received for unauthorised occupation merely substitutes lost rent. Since the property remained intact, the receipt was taxable as revenue income under Section 23(1).
ITAT held that assessing an AOP without initiating reassessment proceedings against it is impermissible in law. The entire reassessment was declared non-est and additions were deleted.
The Tribunal restricted additions on demonetization-era cash deposits where books were audited and not rejected. Only a nominal amount was sustained to balance equity.
