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 ...
The ITAT Delhi upheld the deletion of a RS.4 crore addition made under Section 68 against Livros Publishing Pvt. Ltd., ruling that the share application money received through banking channels from a listed NBFC.
The ITAT ruled that the CIT(A) cannot set aside a reassessment order framed under Section 147 read with Section 144B, as the limited power to remand only applies to best-judgment assessments under Section 144. The Tribunal sent the penny stock LTCG case back, directing the CIT(A) to decide the appeal strictly on its merits.
Delhi High Court upheld reassessment for Agroha Fincap, ruling that the sanction “Yes, I am convinced it is a fit case” meets Section 151 requirements, rejecting the ITAT’s finding of mechanical approval.
Learn why the ITAT quashed the deemed dividend addition. The Tribunal found the payment was a salary adjustment, not a loan, and the AO failed to disprove the source of the cash credit.
The ITAT Mumbai deleted a ₹2.30 crore penalty u/s 271(1)(c) imposed on World Series Hockey Pvt Ltd, ruling that a disallowance of a bad debts claim made in good faith does not attract penalty.
ITAT, Pune, ruled in Manisha Dhananjay Holkar vs. ITO that CIT (Appeals) [CIT(A)] cannot dismiss an appeal solely due to appellant’s non-appearance.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), allowed the appeal of P. Maneklal & Co., deleting the addition of Rs. 4,78,500 under Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, made for unexplained gold stock found during a survey.
ITAT Ahmedabad dismisses Income Tax Dept’s appeal, ruling that only the 0.7% margin earned on E-top-up sales routed to Vodafone is taxable income under Section 69A.
ITAT Ahmedabad sets aside GST assessment denial, remanding case for fresh hearing. Court holds non-compliance was due to severe family illness, violating natural justice.
Pune ITAT rules CIT(A) wrongly applied new S. 251(1) proviso to remand a scrutiny assessment, which only applies to S. 144 orders. CIT(A) directed to decide the appeal on merits.
