Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
Income Tax : Understand the statutory time limits for issuing income-tax notices and completing assessments under the Income-tax Act. The guide...
Income Tax : Learn the updated provisions governing rectification, assessments, reassessments, and appeals under the Income-tax Act. This guide...
Income Tax : Learn how different types of income tax assessments are conducted under the Income-tax Act. The FAQs explain assessment procedures...
Income Tax : Section 154 permits rectification of mistakes apparent from the record in assessment orders, intimations, and TDS/TCS processing 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 : It has been observed that in many cases an assessee may wish to make a claim which was not made in the return of income filed unde...
Income Tax : We have attached a file in excel format. The file contains the format of various details which normally assessing officer asks As...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that additions made in an intimation under Section 143(1) cannot be disputed in an appeal against a scrutiny a...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held legal services are not FTS under Section 9(1)(vii) and directed partner-wise DTAA examination. FTS addition was de...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai deleted a Section 69 addition after finding documentary evidence established joint ownership, source of funds, and ear...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai quashed reassessment after finding no Section 143(2) notice and that the AO issued a final order disguised as a draft ...
Income Tax : ITAT Surat held that delayed filing of Form 10B is a procedural lapse and remanded the matter after directing the AO to consider t...
Income Tax : Instruction No.1/2015 Clarification regarding applicability of section 143(1D) of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Vide Finance Act, 2012...
ITAT held that the obligation to receive cash was rooted in an agreement executed before the 2015 amendment to Section 269SS. Since reasonable cause existed, penalty under Section 271D was not sustainable.
ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that detailed stock, sales, VAT, and bank records satisfactorily explained cash deposits of ₹2.07 crore, overturning additions made by AO and CIT(A).
The Tribunal ruled that the disallowance of interest on the ground of mixed-funds usage could not be sustained without allowing the AO to verify supporting documents. The matter was remitted to ensure a fresh and fair assessment in accordance with law.
ITAT Hyderabad held that the final assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) passed beyond statutory time limits is invalid. The ruling reinforces that the outer limit under section 153 cannot be extended, emphasizing strict compliance with limitation provisions.
ITAT Hyderabad condoned a 292-day delay in filing an appeal due to the assessee’s age, dependence, and overseas travel. The case is remanded for fresh adjudication of capital gains, ensuring fair opportunity and justice.
ITAT Pune ruled that the Maharashtra PSI-2007 subsidy of ₹37.85 crore is a capital receipt. The order reversed CIT(A) and AO’s revenue treatment, protecting the assessee from taxation.
The ITAT held that income appearing in Form 26AS cannot be taxed unless actually received when the assessee follows cash accounting. The ruling confirms that 26AS entries alone cannot justify additions.
The Tribunal upheld the addition because the assessee could not prove the creditor’s identity, financial capacity, or the genuineness of the ₹50 lakh credit. Defective confirmation, NIL income of the creditor, and absence of source details weighed against the assessee. The ruling emphasizes that Section 68 requires clear, credible evidence.
ITAT upheld rejection of books under Section 145(3) due to incomplete records but reduced estimated net profit from 8% to 2%. Historical profit trends guided a fairer assessment.
Mumbai ITAT permits deduction under Section 57(iii) for ₹30.90 lakh interest paid on housing loan deployed to earn interest income. The ruling confirms that loan purpose, not its label, determines eligibility.
