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 Ahmedabad held that reassessment under Section 147 was invalid as the Assessing Officer failed to show independent applicatio...
Income Tax : ITAT Chandigarh held that cash deposits during demonetization could not be treated as unexplained income since the amounts were re...
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 Nagpur held that nominal donations received in small amounts could not be treated as non-voluntary contributions merely becau...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai deleted the addition under Section 56(2)(vii)(b) after holding that a 2.3% variation between agreement value and stamp...
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...
ITAT held that the delay in filing appeal was caused by genuine reasons, including the taxpayer’s age and misunderstanding of online procedures. The case was remanded to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
Delhi ITAT held that AYs 2010–11 and 2011–12 fell outside the limitation for Section 153C and found no valid incriminating material for later years, setting aside all related assessments.
ITAT Hyderabad sent back the disallowance of Rs. 25.93 crore on pension bond adjustments and Rs. 21.92 crore on pension trust payments for verification due to contradictory claims and ITR reporting errors.
ITAT upheld reopening of assessment but allowed Section 54 exemption, ruling that construction delay due to YEIDA’s possession issues was beyond assessee’s control and thus eligible for relief.
The tribunal upheld deletion of ₹45 crore additions where losses from share transactions were disallowed as bogus. It held that all transactions were recorded, disclosed, and supported by evidence.
ITAT Delhi upholds capital receipt status of E-tax subsidies and deletes disallowances on leasehold expenses, Section 14A, bank charges, and MAT additions for PVR Ltd.
The Tribunal condoned an 86-day delay in filing the appeal, accepting the assessee’s unavoidable family issues as a reasonable cause. This confirms that genuine reasons can justify late appeals under tax law.
The Tribunal held that common area maintenance (CAM) charges are separate from rent and constitute contractual payments, making them liable for TDS under Section 194C. The AO is directed to recompute CAM charges accordingly.
Tribunal held that incremental cash deposits in bank accounts cannot be treated as unexplained under Section 68 without concrete evidence. Addition of Rs. 40.32 lakh was deleted.
The Tribunal held that the notice u/s 148 issued without prior approval of the specified authority under Section 151(ii) is invalid. The reassessment order for AY 2017-18 was quashed.
