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 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 : ITAT Delhi held that interest and dividend earned from co-operative banks qualify for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d). Totgar's ...
Income Tax : Instruction No.1/2015 Clarification regarding applicability of section 143(1D) of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Vide Finance Act, 2012...
The Tribunal held that when sales are accepted and books of account are not rejected, the entire amount of disputed purchases cannot be added to income. It directed the Assessing Officer to tax only the profit element embedded in such purchases following settled judicial principles.
The Tribunal held that section 50 merely prescribes a special method for computing gains on depreciable assets and does not convert a long-term capital asset into a short-term capital asset. Consequently, long-term capital losses were permitted to be set off against such gains under section 74.
The Tribunal ruled that the guideline value recorded in a registered document is not conclusive for computing capital gains if the assessee proves that a higher amount was genuinely paid. The decision underscores the importance of substantive evidence over mere recitals in the sale deed.
Addition of ₹90 lakh made under section 69A towards alleged cash payment for purchase of property as well as the addition made under section 69C on account of alleged unaccounted purchases was deleted as additions based solely on third-party documents, without independent corroboration or evidence directly linking the transactions to assessee were not sustainable in law.
The Tribunal emphasized that detailed quantitative reconciliation and accepted export realizations carried substantial evidentiary value in the diamond trade. In the absence of discrepancies in stock records or sales, the alleged bogus purchase addition was deleted in full.
The Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to additional interest under Section 244A(1A) because the Assessing Officer failed to pass the appeal effect order within the statutory timeline.
The Tribunal held that once Second Line Support services were examined and covered under an Advance Pricing Agreement, disallowance under Section 37(1) could not be sustained.
ITAT remanded the case as NFAC passed an ex parte order despite notice issues and held that a combined reassessment and ITAT effect order was invalid.
ITAT Mumbai upheld the CIT(A)’s directions to verify fund flow, bank statements, and lenders’ creditworthiness before making additions. The Tribunal found the remand approach legally justified and free from infirmity.
The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer after finding that transfer pricing adjustments may have been added twice while computing the assessee’s income. The issue requires fresh examination after granting an opportunity of hearing.
