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...
The ITAT Ranchi has ruled that an Assessing Officer cannot reopen an assessment based on “reason to suspect,” distinguishing it from “reason to believe.”
The ITAT Chandigarh ruled that a penalty notice without a specific charge is invalid, leading to the deletion of a penalty under Section 271AAB.
The ITAT Chandigarh deleted additions under Section 153A, ruling that an assessment cannot be reopened without incriminating material found during a search.
The Mumbai ITAT ruled that under Section 50C(3), the stamp duty value prevails over a higher DVO valuation. Learn how this impacts capital gains tax.
A Chandigarh hospital’s Rs.3.91 crore tax addition is remanded for reassessment after a faulty software report skewed patient data, causing a major tax dispute.
ITAT Mumbai held that entire bogus purchases can never be treated as income only profit element embedded in the accommodation entry is to be brought to tax. Accordingly, order of CIT(A) restricting disallowance @12.5% justified.
ITAT Chennai held that passing of ex-parte order by CIT(A) due to non-compliance of assessee without going into merits is not justifiable. CIT(A) is bound to decide the appeal on merits even in the absence of assessee. Accordingly, matter restored back.
It was pertinent to note that assessee was an agriculturist and semiliterate person, not well versed with the income tax proceedings, therefore, it was the duty of AO to apprise him the correct position instead of putting an extra tax liability because of his ignorance.
ITAT Jaipur held that merely the claim of the assessee was not entertained it cannot be a reason automatically to levy the penalty for misreporting or under reporting of the income. Accordingly, levy of penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act set aside.
ITAT Mumbai rules that a lack of response to notices cannot justify a disallowance under Section 40A(2)(b). The AO must prove payments are excessive.
