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 Tribunal set aside the assessment after noting that books of accounts were not produced and required reconsideration. It directed a fresh decision with proper opportunity, emphasizing procedural fairness.
The Tribunal examined disallowance made for delayed employee contributions under Section 143(1). It held that debatable issues cannot be adjusted at the processing stage, resulting in relief to the assessee. The ruling clarifies procedural boundaries.
The issue involved validity of penalty proceedings initiated through an unsigned notice. The Tribunal ruled that such a notice is invalid and cannot confer jurisdiction. The decision highlights the mandatory requirement of proper authentication.
The Tribunal held that TDS credit cannot be denied merely because it does not appear under the assessee’s PAN. It ruled that the assessee cannot be forced to ensure revision of TDS returns by the deductor.
The Tribunal set aside the dismissal of a delayed appeal, holding that the issue of distribution fee taxability requires fresh examination on merits. The case was remanded to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration with proper hearing.
The issue was whether penalty under Section 270A is valid without specifying the exact charge. ITAT held that absence of a specific limb of misreporting makes the penalty invalid.
The issue was whether failure to deduct TDS due to court directions attracts default. The Tribunal held that compliance with binding interim orders prevents liability under Section 201.
The case involved cash deposits during demonetization treated as unexplained income. The tribunal accepted the explanation of foreign remittances and deleted the addition, emphasizing lack of contrary evidence.
The Tribunal held that interest earned from co-operative banks qualifies for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d). It clarified that co-operative banks are to be treated as co-operative societies. The ruling resolves disputes on eligibility of such income.
The Tribunal upheld reduced addition as earlier years’ rulings fixed profit element at 0.2%. It stressed that consistent facts require consistent treatment. Key takeaway: uniform approach must be followed across years.
