Income Tax : The three-judge bench of Supreme Court of India in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/S Pepsi Foods Ltd struck dow...
Income Tax : A perusal of this order reveals that the Tribunal has recorded a finding that it is empowered by Section 254 of the Act to stay pr...
Income Tax : The existing provisions of Section 254(2) provide for a time-limit of four years from the date of the order of the Appellate Tribu...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that although foreign commission expenditure was non-genuine and liable for disallowance, amounts already written...
Income Tax : The Bombay High Court held that reassessment proceedings became time-barred because no reassessment order was passed within the li...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi confirmed deletion of addition on alleged diversion of interest-bearing funds, holding that hypothetical or notional in...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that challenges to appreciation of evidence amount to review, not rectification. It ruled that Section 254(2) pe...
Income Tax : The Tribunal examined disallowance made for delayed employee contributions under Section 143(1). It held that debatable issues can...
ITAT Raipur held that addition towards unexplained credits on estimated basis should be the average GP rate from the preceding 3 years. In the present case the same is taken as 5% without any basis. Accordingly, matter restored back to file of AO.
The ITAT deleted a penalty under Section 271(1)(c), ruling that once the capital gains deductions (Section 54EC/54F) are substantially allowed in the quantum appeal, there’s no concealment of income. The Tribunal emphasized that filing a belated return within Section 139(4) does not automatically invalidate a genuine deduction claim, making the penalty unsustainable.
Kolkata ITAT ruled in DCIT vs. Jupiter International that a ₹6.7 crore addition in an unabated tax year was illegal. Jurisdiction under Section 153A fails without seized, incriminating material, per SC precedent.
ITAT Kolkata held that penalty paid to private entities/ third parties towards breach of contract is the usual course of business and doesn’t involve payment of penalty for infraction of any law hence disallowance made under Explanation to Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act is unwarranted.
The ITAT confirmed the penalty levy, ruling that a subsequent rectification order allowing carry-forward losses doesn’t affect the penalty base. Penalty is tied to the tax evaded on the additions confirmed by the appellate body ( crore), not the final assessed income.
ITAT Jaipur held that the Alumni Association cannot be said to be working for the benefit of its members only and the same will amount for the benefit of public at large. Accordingly, Alumni Association is for the benefit of public and eligible for registration. Thus, appeal is allowed.
ITAT Delhi ruled that a consultancy company with zero turnover could deduct necessary expenses, allowing the full Rs.8.66 lakh security charge as an establishment cost.
ITAT Delhi quashes search assessments for Jagat Group, ruling that a single, consolidated approval letter for multiple assessees and years under Section 153D was invalid and mechanical.
ITAT Chandigarh held that disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act set aside since own funds and reserves of the assessee are more than sufficient to cover the investment made during the year. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
ITAT Delhi held that as per section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act final assessment order is to be passed within one month from the end of the month in which directions issued by DRP is received by AO. Assessment order passed beyond the period prescribed u/s. 144C(13) is time barred and liable to be quashed.
