Income Tax : ITAT held that where sales are not disputed, entire purchases cannot be disallowed. Only 15% profit element was taxed, reinforcing...
Income Tax : The Tribunal quashed reassessment proceedings as they were based on a mere change of opinion without any fresh tangible material. ...
Income Tax : The issue involved levy of late fees on TDS returns processed before statutory amendment. The Tribunal held that absence of enabli...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that valuation without giving the assessee an opportunity to object violates natural justice. It remanded the ma...
Income Tax : The Tribunal condoned delay due to reasonable cause and addressed valuation mismatch. It remanded the issue for DVO-based reassess...
The ITAT Amritsar held that a reassessment under Section 147 was void as the Section 148 notice was issued without complying with procedural requirements and statutory service obligations.
Mumbai ITAT permits deduction under Section 57(iii) for ₹30.90 lakh interest paid on housing loan deployed to earn interest income. The ruling confirms that loan purpose, not its label, determines eligibility.
ITAT Mumbai held that disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the exempt income, upholding judicial precedents and deleting Rs. 6.66 crore addition, emphasizing that hypothetical income cannot be taxed.
The Tribunal emphasized that for notices issued before 01.04.2021, the sanctioning power rested solely with the JCIT, making the PCIT’s approval invalid. Consequently, the ₹82.89 crore disallowance and all further proceedings were set aside.
Tribunal remanded the case after finding that documentary evidence submitted during assessment was not examined. The matter is sent back for fresh evaluation with an opportunity of hearing.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that donations linked to milk supply were compulsory and cannot be treated as corpus contributions under Section 11(1)(d). The trust’s claim for exemption was denied, though a statutory deduction of 15% on revenue was allowed.
Addition of Rs. 2.82 lakh for deemed rent was maintained due to lack of credible evidence from the assessee. Loan interest is to be reconsidered after proper document submission.
The Tribunal held that employer-provided business advances cannot be classified as income under Section 69A without proper verification, remanding the case for limited review of TDS and expense records.
The Tribunal held that the assessment was void because jurisdiction shifted between officers without a mandatory transfer order. It reaffirmed that proceedings without statutory jurisdiction are null and void.
Even though the assessee had opted for DTVSVA, the non-payment of tax meant the settlement did not materialize. The Tribunal restored the appeal to CIT(A) to examine all submitted evidence, ensuring a fair opportunity to contest additions.
