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 held that mandatory interest can still be examined for correct computation. CIT(A)’s ex parte dismissal without merit-based adjudication was set aside.
ITAT restored an appeal after finding the delay was linked to notices sent to a former consultant and directed fresh disposal on merits after hearing.
ITAT held that a clerical error in selecting the wrong ITR column cannot defeat an otherwise valid deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i).
The ITAT held that Section 54 exemption must be examined separately for each residential house sold. The benefit cannot be restricted to one new house merely because multiple houses were transferred.
ITAT remanded the matter after holding that the CIT(A) passed a non-speaking order without giving reasons or properly considering the assessee’s submissions.
ITAT held that Section 87A rebate cannot be denied on tax payable under Section 111A where the assessee qualifies under the prescribed income limit and follows settled Tribunal rulings.
The ITAT Delhi held that the CIT(A) must pass a speaking order under Section 250(6) and cannot dismiss an appeal solely for non-compliance. It remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after granting proper opportunity to the assessee.
The ITAT Delhi held that the Assessing Officer could not make a disallowance under Section 14A when the case was selected only for limited scrutiny regarding deduction under Section 57. As no approval for complete scrutiny was obtained, the addition was deleted.
The Tribunal held that Schedule-I of ITR-7 applies only to amounts accumulated under Section 11(2) and not to deemed application under Explanation (1) to Section 11(1). It deleted the addition after finding that the lower authorities had incorrectly interpreted the ITR instructions.
The ITAT held that the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal merely for non-prosecution. The appellate authority must adjudicate every appeal on merits and provide reasons as required under Section 250(6).
