Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that an addition under Section 69A cannot be sustained when the assessee is denied the opportunity to cross-exami...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai remanded the case to examine whether Section 56(2)(x) applied based on the agreement date and to consider refund of ex...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata condoned appeal delay, set aside the CIT(A)'s order, and remanded the assessment for fresh adjudication after grantin...
Income Tax : ITAT Nagpur held that a 50-year lease is not a transfer under Section 2(47)(vi) where the transaction is only a lease and not an a...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad allowed Section 10(10B) exemption on BSNL VRS compensation, following coordinate bench rulings despite no claim in ...
Income Tax : ITAT held an assessment passed after the taxpayer's death was invalid in law, quashed the order, and treated all remaining issues ...
ITAT Jaipur held that addition towards unsecured loan cannot be sustained since identity of lenders, creditworthiness of parties and genuineness of loan transaction duly proved. Accordingly, CIT(A) order upheld and appeal of revenue dismissed.
Tribunal remanded issue of unexplained cash deposits under Section 68 to Assessing Officer for fresh verification, citing lack of adequate opportunity and consideration of evidence by lower authorities.
Tribunal held that notional rent on unsold flats treated as stock-in-trade cannot be taxed under Income from House Property. The ruling clarifies that only actual rental income or sale proceeds are taxable, protecting developers from arbitrary assessments.
ITAT Mumbai held that benefit under section 115BAA of the Income Tax Act cannot be denied for inadvertent filing of Form 10-IB in place of Form 10-IC since the same is technical lapse. Accordingly, order of CIT(A) is sustained and appeal of revenue is dismissed.
Delhi High Court directed payment of ₹ 36.85 lakh plus interest after Income-Tax Department delayed acting on ITAT order on indexation for inherited asset of AY 2016-17.
The ITAT Mumbai held that income already taxed in the hands of a trust cannot be taxed again in the hands of its beneficiary, deleting an addition of ₹1.24 crore.
Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) and liability under section 201 operated independently, and assessee could not escape TDS liability merely by making a partial disallowance in its return.
The Mumbai ITAT partly allowed Trustar Diamond’s appeal, reducing the addition on alleged bogus diamond purchases from 12.5% to 3% to maintain consistency with the assessee’s previous assessment years. The court noted that sales figures were accepted and the 3% restriction reflected the historical disallowance pattern.
ITAT Delhi held that reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act on the basis of stale information results into change of opinion and the same is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, appeal is allowed and reopening is quashed.
ITAT Ahmedabad dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, confirming CIT(A)’s deletion of ₹1.06 crore addition under Section 41(1). The tribunal held that the unsecured loans were used for capital expenditure, not trading purposes, making the addition inapplicable.
