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 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the CIT(A)’s ruling, deleting unexplained money and commission additions made against Riddhesh Girishbhai Bhandari following a search.
ITAT Ahmedabad dismisses the Revenue’s appeals for AY 2017-18 and 2018-19, allowing the Rs.380 crore S 80IA deduction for operating infrastructure facilities, relying on prior cases and Madras HC precedents.
ITAT Mumbai set aside ex-parte assessment and appellate orders against the assessee for AY 2022-23. The matter is restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, with the assessee directed to pay ₹25,000 to the PM Relief Fund.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Ahmedabad has dismissed a Revenue appeal, affirming that a real estate developer was correctly allowed to claim a project loss.
The Tribunal ruled that the addition, based on uncorroborated loose papers and rough jottings, was invalid. The decision followed a similar ruling in a co-partner’s case, establishing that such evidence without independent verification cannot be the sole basis for taxation.
ITAT Ahmedabad upheld reopening of assessment for undisclosed high-value property sale, but remanded the Rs. 2.01 crore capital gain for fresh valuation due to flawed valuation reports.
The Tribunal condoned a 376-day delay in filing the appeal, citing a consultant’s lapse, and ruled that the assessee was denied a fair hearing. The case was remanded for a detailed examination of jurisdictional and factual issues.
Explore the ITAT Cochin’s decision in the Chundayil Kalam Girijadevi vs. ITO case, which sets a precedent that a tax penalty cannot be levied for an honest mistake in claiming a higher gratuity exemption.
Cochin ITAT rules that only essential expenses like plumbing and electrical works qualify for deduction under Section 54F, while luxury interiors such as modular kitchens, wardrobes, and ACs are not eligible. Partial relief granted.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Cochin has quashed an assessment order against Al Zarafa Travel & Manpower Consultants, ruling that the Assessing Officer’s jurisdiction was invalid.
