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 Kolkata quashed the assessment as the jurisdictional Assessing Officer did not issue the mandatory notice under Section 143(2...
Income Tax : Bangalore ITAT deleted Section 40(a)(ia), notional interest, ICDS and Section 68 additions, citing Form 26A compliance and evident...
Income Tax : Bangalore ITAT remanded FD interest addition, directing verification of fund ownership and held Form 26AS alone is not determinati...
Income Tax : Bangalore ITAT held entire alleged bogus purchases cannot be added where sales are accepted, restricting the addition to 1.15% pro...
Income Tax : Bangalore ITAT held TP adjustments apply only to international AE transactions and upheld verified capacity, working capital and o...
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...
In ACIT vs. Hallmark Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., the ITAT Ranchi upheld the deletion of a Rs. 6 crore income addition, ruling that the director’s statement alone, without corroborative evidence, could not be the basis for assessment.
Chennai ITAT rules that S. 194C(6) (obtaining PAN) and S. 194C(7) (filing statement) are independent. A procedural lapse in filing Form 26Q cannot justify a disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia).
The ITAT Delhi ruled that an Assessing Officer could not disregard the Tribunal’s prior order regarding the manual vs. electronic filing of Form 10, deleting the disallowance.
The ITAT Delhi dismissed the revenue’s appeal, ruling that interest on External Development Charges (EDC) is a deductible revenue expense, not a penal or capital one.
ITAT Delhi partly allows assessee’s appeal, holding Rs.70.46 lakh addition for Kolkata property wrongly made in wife’s hands; entire investment made and disclosed by husband.
ITAT Chennai held that invocation of revisionary proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act not justified as AO has applied his mind and revision u/s. 263 cannot be possible for mere change of opinion. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
ITAT Chennai held that adhoc disallowance of expenses merely on the basis of suspicion without adequate evidence and cogent reason is not tenable in law. Accordingly, adhoc disallowance under repair and maintenance and sundry expense set aside.
ITAT Pune rules that PCIT cannot revise an assessment under Section 263 if the AO took a plausible view. The 10% tolerance limit under Section 43CA is retrospective.
ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards cash deposit during demonetization not justified since assessee has sufficiently explained that the said deposit is from earlier withdrawal. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
Pune ITAT deletes disallowance of cash-based remuneration to partners and salaries to employees, finding no legal bar or evidence of inflated expenses.
