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 case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny to examine the source of cash deposits made during the demonetization period. During demonetization period assessee had deposited a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- in her bank account on 16.11.2016.
ITAT Raipur held that passing of CIT(A) order was ex-parte without hearing the assessee and there is sufficient cause shown by assessee in not attending hearings as per opportunities granted by CIT(A). Accordingly, matter remanded back to CIT(A).
Addition under section 68 for Long-term capital gains (LTCG) from sale of shares allotted pursuant to a demerger scheme as bogus and alleged that price manipulation based on a report from the Investigation Wing of the Income tax Department was not justified as the assessee proved genuineness by comprehensive documentary evidence.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that mere titular ownership of bank account is not conclusive. Thus, addition u/s. 69A of the Income tax Act towards unexplained cash deposit cannot be sustained without proper inquiry into identity of actual beneficiary of cash deposits.
ITAT Bangalore deletes ₹25.8L penalty under Section 271D as AO failed to record satisfaction in assessment order. Procedural lapse proved fatal.
Mumbai ITAT dismisses Bajaj Hindusthan Sugar Limited’s appeal for AY 2023-24 as withdrawn, noting it was a duplicate filing after an earlier appeal was already disposed of.
ITAT Ahmedabad ruled on Naliniben Dipakbhai Patel vs ITO, deleting an addition under Section 69A, stating investment source investigation belongs to the actual investor.
ITAT Ahmedabad clarifies that common area maintenance charges recovered from a sub-tenant, when reimbursed against actual expenses, are not rental income.
The Kolkata ITAT quashes a reassessment notice issued under Section 148, citing it was time-barred. The decision clarifies the application of TOLA and the new reassessment regime.
ITAT Chennai sets aside a best judgment assessment for a charitable trust, ordering a fresh hearing after noting prior Section 11 exemption and appellate procedural issues.
