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...
Kolkata ITAT ruled the ITO lacked jurisdiction to reassess OSL Developers’ income after its case was transferred to another authority, nullifying the reassessment order.
ITAT Delhi held that income earned by GoDaddy.com from providing domain name registration services to Indian Customers is not taxable in India. Further, income from provision of non-domain service fall outside ambit of Fee for Technical Services and hence not taxable.
ITAT Bangalore rejected Jurimatrix Services’ appeal citing a 596-day delay and no grievance against a Section 263 order, highlighting the need for timely and forum-appropriate appeals.
Aggrieved by CIT(A)’s order, Revenue filed an appeal before ITAT. Revenue argued that AO’s disallowances were justified, particularly the allocation of interest to joint venture accounts and the disallowance of management and land development expenses due to insufficient evidence.
ITAT Mumbai clarifies derivative income taxability for Mauritius fund. Rules derivatives are distinct from shares, exempting gains from Indian tax under India-Mauritius DTAA Article 13(4).
ITAT Bangalore rules that merely disallowing advances written off and interest claims does not warrant a penalty under Section 271(1)(c), reinforcing that an honest claim, even if rejected, is not an inaccurate particular of income.
ITAT Bangalore held that delay of more than 5 years in filing of an appeal before CIT(A) condoned as reason for delay found to be genuine. Accordingly, order of CIT(A) quashed and matter restored back to CIT(A).
ITAT Allahabad held that in the absence of any comparable cases, the past history of the assessee, which has been accepted in many assessments under section 143(3) of the Act, cannot be overlooked. Accordingly, directed to assess net profit @3.5% instead of 7%/5% of contractual receipts.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that merely because some parties didn’t respond to the notice of AO, entire expenditure cannot be held as non-genuine. Accordingly, deletion of addition by CIT(A) upheld.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that exemption u/s. 54F and 54B of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied solely on the ground of non-adherence to strict time limits. Accordingly, the assessee is entitled to claim the deduction in respect of investments made beyond the prescribed time period.
