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 held that interest earned by a co-operative society from investments with co-operative banks falls within Section 80P(2)(d). Such income is deductible, subject to verification of the source and bifurcation.
The Tribunal held that where reassessment is based solely on search material found during a third-party search, proceedings must be initiated under section 153C. Reopening under section 147 was held to be without jurisdiction and quashed.
The Tribunal held that corpus donations cannot be denied merely due to technical lapses like student collection or minor PAN errors. Donor intent and consistent treatment in books were sufficient to allow exemption under section 11(1)(d).
The Tribunal held that section 50C could not be applied where the sale consideration exceeded the value accepted by the stamp authority. A clerical error in departmental data could not justify substitution of sale value.
The tribunal held that assessments selected for limited scrutiny cannot include additions on unrelated issues without formal conversion to complete scrutiny. All such additions were set aside as being without jurisdiction.
The ITAT held that when reassessment is annulled for jurisdictional defects under the faceless regime, the connected concealment penalty cannot stand.
The issue was whether the appellate authority could bypass jurisdictional objections by remanding the case. The tribunal held that legal grounds striking at jurisdiction must be adjudicated first.
The Tribunal held that additions based solely on third-party GST information and suspicion cannot be sustained without independent investigation, restricting estimation to 1% of sales.
The Tribunal ruled that compensation and hardship allowance received during redevelopment are capital receipts and cannot be taxed as income from other sources.
The Tribunal quashed reassessment proceedings after finding that the Assessing Officer already possessed complete information before issuing notice under section 148.
