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 reassessment initiated with approval from the wrong authority is invalid when issued beyond three years. The entire proceedings were quashed. The key takeaway is that proper sanction under Section 151 is mandatory.
ITAT held that estimating profit at 8% without considering records was excessive. It reduced the rate to 3% based on business realities. The key takeaway is that estimation must be reasonable and evidence-based.
The Tribunal condoned a delay of 615 days after finding that the assessee was actively pursuing rectification remedies under Section 154. It held that such bona fide conduct constitutes sufficient cause and delay cannot be treated as negligence.
ITAT held that an unexplained delay of over 11 years cannot be condoned without valid reasons. The appeal was dismissed as no sufficient cause was proved.
ITAT held that late filing of Form 67 is only a procedural lapse and not a ground to deny FTC. The matter was remanded for verification and grant of eligible credit.
The issue involved denial of exemption on sale of agricultural land. The Tribunal held that the land met conditions of Section 2(14)(iii), making gains non-taxable. The case examined whether land sale constituted business income. The Tribunal ruled that absence of development or trading intent invalidated such classification.
The issue was whether reassessment can survive when no addition is made on the stated reasons for reopening. The Tribunal held that such reassessment is invalid, and the AO cannot make unrelated additions.
The tribunal set aside excessive addition by recognizing both the allotment agreement and joint ownership. It directed proportionate taxation and correct valuation basis. The ruling promotes fairness in assessments.
The tribunal allowed adoption of stamp value as on the agreement date instead of registration. It held the proviso to Section 50C is retrospective as it removes hardship. This provides relief in cases of delayed registration.
ITAT held that statutory transfer of funds to the government is not dividend under Section 2(22). Hence, dividend distribution tax under Section 115-O is not applicable.
