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 Bangalore held that disallowance of agricultural expenses based on estimation is unsustainable without concrete evidence, rul...
Income Tax : ITAT ruled that exemption under Section 54F cannot be denied solely due to missing bills or vouchers, emphasizing the principle of...
Income Tax : Learn about how the holding period of property impacts Capital Gain tax, including ITAT's recent decision clarifying calculations ...
Income Tax : Explore key updates on recent income tax case laws, covering international taxation, business income, and capital gains. Essential...
Income Tax : Discover the implications of a significant Delhi ITAT ruling on cash sales pre-demonetization. Learn how it affects taxation and f...
Income Tax : Learn about hybrid hearing guidelines of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Indore Bench, effective from October 9, 2023, offeri...
Income Tax : Supreme Court of India has recently issued an order requiring all revenue appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) ...
Income Tax : At present appeals are fixed in routine and may take one to two years period even for first hearing. it is humbly submitted that t...
Income Tax : CBI Registers a Case against Accountant Member, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) on the Allegations of Possessing Disproportio...
Income Tax : Law Minister Shri Ravi Shankar Prasad launches 'itat e-dwar', an e-filing portal of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Portal will ena...
Income Tax : n Legal Initiative For Forest And Environment (LIFE Trust) Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi), the stay application was denied as the test for i...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that merely making a claim that is not sustainable does not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of inc...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai held that construction of new dwelling unit on first floor is eligible for deduction under section 54F of the Income ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai grants relief to Tarun Mohan Jani, ruling that property valuation difference within 10% tolerance limit doesn't warran...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that the AO must record a proper satisfaction regarding the incorrectness of the assessee’s claim before inv...
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...
Income Tax : Office Order No. 08 of 2021 Post facto approval of the Competent Authority is hereby conveyed for extension of term of ad-hoc appo...
Income Tax : In continuation of the SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) dated 01.06.2020 the hearing of cases at 'ITAT Chandigarh Benches from 0...
ACIT Vs Hirapanna Jewellers (ITAT Visakhapatnam) In the instant case the assessee has established the sales with the bills and representing outgo of stocks. The sales were duly accounted for in the books of accounts and there were no abnormal profits. In spite of conducting the survey the AO did not find any defects in […]
Talera Automobiles Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dated 21-07-2017 passed by the CIT(A)-5, Pune in relation to the assessment year 2009-10. 2. The only issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of disallowance of foreign travel expenses amounting to Rs.9,29,041/-. 3. Briefly […]
GOCL Corporation Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) Learned counsel’s first and foremost argument is that a corporate guarantee is a shareholder’s activity which has been wrongly treated as an international transaction u/s.92B read with Explanation inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 with retrospective effect from 01-04-2002. He next sought to draw a distinction between the […]
Nutan Warehousing Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) The concept of `accrual of income’ needs to be considered in the hue of the ‘real income theory’. Where accrual of an income takes place but its realisation becomes impossible, such hypothetical income cannot be charged to tax. In the case of mercantile system of accounting, […]
Omkam developers Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) 1. The reasons recorded are based on suspicion, which is evident from the words used in reasons recorded, i.e., “it appears that assessee M/s Omkam Developers Ltd. has received bogus share capital/share premium to the tune of ₹ 1.93 Crores. 2. The Assessing Officer has just accepted the […]
DCIT Vs Saroj Kumar Poddar (ITAT Kolkata) Kolkata bench first of its kind of Interim order on the subject of endless adjournments by revenue on pretext of covid 19 and resultant pains to tax payer languishing for justice held remarkably as follows:- The Revenue is also raising strong objections, without any valid ground, for the […]
ITO Vs Nabinagar Power Generating Co. Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) No addition on account of interest income as same was inextricably linked with setting up of power plant and to be capitalized Conclusion: Since the work of construction of the power plant was under progress, interest incomes are also inextricably linked with the setting up […]
Sri Pradip Kumar Basu Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) It is observed that the long-term capital gain of Rs.6,14,674/- had arisen to the assessee as a result of residential property sold on 12.06.2013 and in order to claim exemption on account of long-term capital gain under section 54EC of the Act, the assessee was required to […]
Since there was no allegation by the departmental authorities that assessee had violated any of the conditions of the provisions of sections 11, 12 and 13, except, the allegation that assessee was a mutual concern and even applying the rule of consistency, assessee’s claim of exemption under section 11 had to be allowed.
AO had to confront assessee with the material collected behind the back of assessee, if he chosen to use the material against assessee and that he should provide assessee an opportunity of cross-examination. Not having done so made the evidence in question bad in law.
