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 Mumbai held that transfer of an undertaking under a court-approved scheme cannot be characterised as a slum sale within the meaning of section 2(42C) hence provisions of section 50B not attracted.
ITAT Mumbai held that assessee is entitled for deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act on the basis of principle of consistency. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed and order of CIT(A) upheld.
The ITAT Mumbai held that the denial of the right to cross-examine a third party whose statement forms the foundation of a tax addition constitutes a serious violation of natural justice, citing the Supreme Court. The Tribunal set aside the 68 additions of 1.56 crore (across two years) and remanded the case to the AO for de novo assessment with mandatory opportunity for cross-examination.
The central issue was the correct depreciation rate for the HP Indigo Digital Press. ITAT Mumbai ruled the printer is an integral part of a computer system due to its reliance on interface and proprietary software, thus allowing the higher 60% depreciation rate. This ruling confirms that machines functionally dependent on a computer system qualify for the higher depreciation applicable to ‘computers’.
The issue was the summary dismissal of the taxpayer’s appeal by the CIT(A) for non-compliance, despite giving only a one-day notice for hearing and a timely adjournment request. The ITAT ruled that dismissing the appeal without granting reasonable time violated the principle of natural justice. The Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the matter back, emphasizing the requirement for adequate opportunity of hearing in appellate proceedings.
ITAT Jabalpur held that additions for unexplained investment in agricultural land cannot be made without proper inquiry into the co-owner’s source of funds. The case has been restored for de novo consideration.
The ITAT Rajkot allowed a taxpayer’s appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)’s order which confirmed over Rs. 1.17 crore in tax additions. The Tribunal ruled that the lower authorities violated natural justice by failing to provide a reasonable opportunity to explain disputed creditors and expense disallowances.
The tribunal remanded the appeal to the Commissioner after the penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars was affirmed. The assessee is now granted a fresh opportunity to submit documents and respond, ensuring substantial justice.
The ITAT confirmed that the stamp duty value on the agreement date should be used for tax calculation, not the registration date, when part consideration is paid electronically beforehand.
Mumbai ITAT restored Discover Ekam Foundation’s Section 12AB registration matter to the CIT(E). Rejection, based on overseas fund use, will be re-adjudicated considering the trust’s revised Memorandum of Association.
