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 ...
Cash deposits arising from routine business collections cannot be wholly treated as unexplained income. The ruling confirms that estimations must reflect the nature of the taxpayer’s business.
The Tribunal held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot survive when the underlying addition is purely estimated. The ruling reinforces that estimation alone does not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars.
The Tribunal upheld depreciation on goodwill arising from amalgamation, relying on Supreme Court precedent. The ruling confirms that excess consideration recognized as goodwill qualifies for depreciation under section 32.
Upholding the CIT(A)s order, the Tribunal held that settled law bars additions made without factual verification. The case reinforces strict limits on arbitrary taxation of loan transactions.
The Tribunal held that DEPB income forms part of operating export income and cannot be excluded from turnover merely on a different view. Revision under section 263 was found unjustified where the original assessment involved due application of mind.
The Tribunal held that reopening based only on generalized information about a scrip, without independent inquiry or linkage to the taxpayer, is invalid. Entire addition on alleged bogus LTCG was deleted.
The Tribunal examined whether a penalty could survive despite an allegedly vague notice. It held that since the assessment order and later notices clearly specified furnishing of inaccurate particulars, the penalty was valid.
The Tribunal held that additions under Section 68 could not be sustained where no incriminating material was found during search. Documentary evidence proving the loan’s genuineness was accepted.
The issue was whether cash deposited during demonetisation could be treated as unexplained. The Tribunal held that when sales are supported by available stock and recorded books, cash receipts from such sales cannot be added under Section 68.
The Tribunal held that when interest-free funds exceed exempt-income investments, no interest disallowance under Section 14A can be made. The ruling reinforces the presumption laid down by the Supreme Court.
