ITAT Bangalore held that delay of 1265 days in filing of an appeal not condoned since negligence on part of the lawyer is not sufficient cause. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee dismissed by not condoning the delay.
The ITAT Hyderabad in ITO Vs. SR Peddi Estates India Pvt. Ltd. confirmed the deletion of a ₹4.39 crore addition made during reassessment. The Tribunal ruled that bank credits
The Tribunal held that capital gains did not arise in the relevant year because the JDA explicitly stated possession was deemed given only upon handing over the landowners’ built-up share. This means Section 45(1) cannot be invoked until actual possession or consideration is received, overriding the AO’s reliance on stamp duty valuation.
ITAT allows S. 80-IA deduction, ruling that the Form 10CCB filing delay is a procedural lapse that can’t deny a substantive claim, maintaining the judicial view post-Finance Act 2020.
The Supreme Court ruled that a deed mortgaging property to secure one’s own performance is a Mortgage Deed, even if the title suggests a security bond, affirming deficit stamp duty demands. This provides critical legal clarity that when the principal debtor is the party providing the security, Article 40 of the Indian Stamp Act is the governing provision.
ITAT Hyderabad upholds remand for ex-parte reassessment, allowing the assessee to challenge the Section 148 notice validity based on the mandatory faceless procedure violation in fresh proceedings.
ITAT Hyderabad sustains unexplained investment based on a builder’s seized document with matching sale details but deletes gift addition, citing the Revenue’s failure to disprove the donor’s capacity.
ITAT Ahmedabad deletes Rs.11.27 lakh addition for penny stock investment, ruling the Revenue failed to prove the investment originated from the assessee’s own unexplained funds under Section 69B.
ITAT Pune sets aside NFAC’s ex-parte order, mandating fresh adjudication on S. 44AD applicability to commission income, citing violation of natural justice and lack of proper notice.
ITAT Hyderabad in Pitti Holdings Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT quashes a reassessment for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The order holds that notices issued by the Jurisdictional AO (JAO) instead of the Faceless AO (FAO) after the Faceless Jurisdiction Scheme 2022 are void ab initio.
