In Deepak T. Dhanwani vs ITO, where ITAT Chennai waived penalty for delayed tax audit report due to accountant’s unavailability,
ITAT Ahmedabad case between Standard Radiators Pvt Ltd and ACIT, involving an inaccurate income penalty dispute related to interest expense misclassification
ITAT Hyderabad order, wherein Mohammed Rahimuddin successfully appeals the penalty u/s 271A due to estimation-based income addition.
CESTAT’s decision clarifies that since the rent received by individual co-owners is below the specified threshold, there is no basis for imposing service tax on these amounts.
In Ram Kishan Vs ITO case, ITAT Delhi ruled that no addition u/s 69A of Income Tax Act when income source was appropriately explained during assessment.
Read about dismissal of an appeal by ITAT Mumbai in case of BLPL Singapore Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT. Sssessee’s appeal against penalty order under Section 270A for non-disclosure of interest income was dismissed.
CESTAT Kolkata held that as per substituted provisions of Rule 14 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, interest is not leviable where wrongly availed credit is only taken but not utilized.
ITAT Kolkata held that depreciation is allowable on asset of the assessee if acquisition is claimed as application of income. Notably, after change in law in section 11(6), assessee has not claimed acquisition of property towards application of income while computing the total taxable income.
ITAT Amritsar held that rejection of application for registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as there is no violation of section 13(1)(c) by paying remuneration to the full-time working trustee.
ITAT Delhi’s landmark judgement, which annulled late filing fee under Section 234E of the IT Act on grounds of limitation.
