Case Title: Asstt. CIT Versus Iqbal Ali Khan

The Hyderabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that exemption under Section 54F of the Income Tax Act is not available on property predominantly being used for religious purposes.

Case Title: Ethiraj Hotel Mart Versus DCIT

The Chennai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the addition of unexplained investment in stock as a difference in the valuation of stock.

Case Title: Indian Chamber of Commerce Versus DCIT

The Kolkata Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the Indian Chamber of Commerce (ICC) is entitled to claim exemption in respect of its entire receipts.

Case Title: DCIT verses Alom Extrusions Ltd.

Finding that assessee has discharged the burden of proving identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the creditors to the loan transaction, the Kolkata ITAT deleted the addition made for alleged unexplained loan under Section 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961 based on the statement of third-party in a post-search assessment whose cross-examination was never allowed to assessee.

Case Title: Edelweiss Asset Management Ltd verses ACIT

While setting aside the CIT(A)'s order enhancing assessee's income under Section 251(1)(a) of Income tax Act, 1961 by disallowing Employees Stock Option Plan (ESOP) expenses under Section 37(1), the Mumbai ITAT held that the CIT(A) has acted beyond his jurisdiction in enhancing assessee's income, since the AO during the course of assessment, has not taken into consideration the assessee's revised return and has not examined the taxability of ESOP expenses.

Case Title: Lex Sportel Vision Pvt Ltd Verses Income Tax Officer

Emphasizing that the right to broadcast live events i.e., “Live Rights”, is not “copyright” and therefore any payment made thereto can't be said to be chargeable to tax as royalty under section 9(1)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961, the Delhi ITAT holds assessee as not in default for non-deduction of tax at source on foreign remittances made towards acquisition of right to broadcast 'live-events'.

Case Title: The Synthetic & Art Silk Mills Research Association verses Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)

While setting aside the revision order passed on the ground that the AO did not conduct any enquiry or verification which should have been made with regards to income from auditorium hire charges, hoarding site & service charges and rent vis-a-vis Trust's objectives and consequential eligibility under Section 10(21), the Bench opined that it is important to show that the view taken by the AO is wholly unsustainable in law before embarking upon exercise of revisionary powers and that the revisionary powers cannot be exercised for directing a fuller inquiry to merely find out if the earlier view taken is erroneous particularly when a view was already taken after inquiry.

Case Title: Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax verses Nishant Kanodia

While opining that even if the taxpayer has left India for the purpose of business or profession, the same shall be considered for purpose of employment outside India under Explanation 1(a) to Section 6(1) of Income tax Act, 1961, the Mumbai ITAT held that assessee has rightly claimed to be a 'non-resident' as he stayed in India only for a period of 176 days during the year which entitles him to non-resident status as per Explanation 1(a) to Section 6(1).

Case Title: Mavenir UK Holdings verses ACIT

Noticing that the draft assessment order was passed on Mar 4, 2022 and the assessee filed objection before the DRP on Apr 6, 2022 which was beyond the due date provided for filing objection, the Delhi ITAT held the assessment order to be time-barred being passed beyond Section 144C(4) of Income tax Act, 1961 time-limit.

Case Title: BCP V Singapore FVCI Pte. Ltd. Versus ACIT

The Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the Singaporean Entity has not escaped the income on repatriating Rs.203.56 Cr. arising from redemption of non-convertible debentures (NCDs).

Information Found In Pen Drive/Laptop Of Employees Can't Be Considered As Credible Evidence Without Corroborative Evidence: ITAT

Case Title: Padmashree Dr. D.Y. Patil University Versus DCIT

The Mumbai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the information found in the pen drive or laptop of employees cannot be considered credible evidence unless it has been corroborated with any other evidence.

Case Title: Farzad Sheriar Jehani Versus ITO

The Mumbai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the assessee was an unsuspecting investor who transacted in a 'penny stock' with a view to earning a quick profit, and since his involvement in any dubious transaction relating to price rigging or connection with exit providers could not be shown, the transaction could not be treated as a 'pre-arranged' one even if there were no underlying fundamentals in or financial performance by the company whose shares were sold.

Case Title: Bhartiya International Ltd. Versus DCIT

The Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the addition made by the AO as there cannot be a sale without a purchase.

Discrepancies In Maintaining KYC Documentation Does Not Constitute Incriminating Material: ITAT Deletes Income Tax Addition

Case Title: Shri Renukamata Multi–State Co-operative Versus Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax

The Mumbai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that income tax addition cannot be made for discrepancies in maintaining KYC documentation, account opening forms, and violation of society bye-laws.

Consequent Generation Of DIN Subsequently & Handwritten In Body Of Order, Will Not Satisfy Conditions Of CBDT Circular No.19/2019: Chennai ITAT

Case Title: Sutherland Global Services Inc verses ACIT

The Chennai ITAT held that the orders passed by the DRP in violation of CBDT Circular No.19/2019 dated Aug 14, 2019, and without allotment of a valid computer-generated Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of such order is invalid, non-est and shall be deemed to have never been issued.

Depreciation Of Goodwill Acquired Pursuant To Slump Sale Under Business Transfer Agreement Is Allowable U/s 32(1): Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Vodafone India Services Pvt Ltd verses DCIT

Emphasizing that although Section 32 of Income tax Act, 1961 was amended by the Finance Act, 2021 wherein it was stated that 'goodwill' is not an intangible asset eligible for depreciation was applicable prospectively with effect from AY 2021-22, the Mumbai ITAT held that claim of depreciation of goodwill acquired pursuant to slump sale under a Business transfer agreement is allowable under Section 32(1).

Comparable Need Selection As Per Correct Market Segment: Delhi ITAT Remits Matter Following Earlier Order

Case Title: American Express Services India Ltd verses DCIT

Relying on Co-ordinate bench ruling in assessee's own case for AY 2004-05 wherein assessee's additional evidences were admitted and matter was remanded back to TPO for fresh adjudication, the Delhi ITAT admitted the assessee's additional evidence application qua comparables selection for AY 2005-06 and 2006-07.

No Addition Permitted In Respect Of Sundry Creditors, Once Purchases & Payments By Taxpayer Not Disputed: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Rajesh G. Jain verses Income Tax Officer

On finding that payment and purchase made by the assessee is not disputed by AO, the Mumbai ITAT directed the AO to delete the addition on sundry creditors.

Receipts For Sale Distribution Of Cinematographic Films Is Not Royalty, Hence Not Liable For TDS Deduction U/S 194J: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Dy. CIT vs M/s Yash Raj Films Pvt. Ltd.

While clarifying that amount received for sale distribution or exhibition of cinematographic films would not fall under the domain of 'Royalty', the Mumbai ITAT deleted the demand/addition for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194J of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Furnishing Inaccurate Claim Of Expenditure Would Not Amount To Giving Inaccurate Particulars Of Income: Mumbai ITAT Quashes Penalty

Case Title: DCIT vs M/s. Sasan Power Ltd

While quashing the appeal filed by Revenue against the order passed u/s 250 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, the Mumbai ITAT upheld the order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (A) to delete the order of penalty issued under section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Creditworthiness Of Share Subscribers To Make Investment In Capital Of Taxpayer Company Not Disputed: Kolkata ITAT Deletes Addition U/s 68

Case Title: Income-tax Officer verses Rajshree Integrated Cold Chain Pvt. Ltd

The Kolkata ITAT deleted the addition made under Section 68 of Income Tax, 1961 after finding that the assessee has established the onus placed upon him in respect of identity and creditworthiness of the share subscribers and also the genuineness of the transactions.

Subsequent Withdrawal Of Registration Is No Impediment In Denying Deduction U/s 35-AC On Donation Received By Charitable Trust: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Ravindra K. Reshamwala verses Income Tax Officer

While relying on the previous order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench under Ravindra K. Reshamwala v/s DCIT in ITA No.2648/Mum/2022, the Mumbai ITAT directed Assessing Officer to allow the claim under Section 35-AC of the Income tax Act, 1961.

PCIT Can Grant Sanction U/s 151 For Issuing Reopening Notice U/s 148 Even After Expiry Of Four Years From End Of Relevant AY: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Leelaben Kantilal Parekh verses Income Tax Officer

The Mumbai ITAT recently reiterated that a notice can be issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, even after the expiry of limitation period, if the sanction for the same has been granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax.

No Additions Permitted U/s 68 Once Assessee Establishes Identity & Creditworthiness Of Lenders And Proved Genuineness Of Transactions: Kolkata ITAT

Case Title: Iris Clothings Limited verses Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

While finding that the assessee has substantiated all evidences concerning transactions to establish the identity and creditworthiness of the lenders and proved the genuineness of the transactions, the Kolkata ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Not Filing Audit Report Along With Return Is Procedural Omission And Not Impediment In Law In Claiming Exemption U/s 11: Ahmedabad ITAT

Case Title: Gyandeep Charitable Trust verses A.D.I.T

While following the order of Co-ordinate Bench, the Ahmedabad ITAT condoned the delay and restored the matter to the file of CIT(A) to allow exemption u/s 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the assessee as per the provisions of law.

Reopening Initiated On Basis Of Wrong Reasons Renders Very Assessment As Invalid: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Good Shepherd Church Verses Income Tax Officer

On finding the reasoning behind the Assessment made by the Assessing Officer to be wrong, the Mumbai ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and National Faceless Appeal Centre.

Industrial Undertaking Eligible For Deduction U/s 80IB On Compensation For Destruction Of Goods Before Sale Took Place: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Colorplus Realty Limited Verses Dy. CIT

On finding profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking within the meaning of an expression under section 80-IB, the Mumbai ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to allow deduction u/s 80-IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

If Identity, Credit Worthiness, And Genuineness Of Transaction Established, Loan Can't Be Treated As Unexplained U/s 68: Ahmedabad ITAT

Case Title: Income-tax Officer verses M/s Aashna Developers Pvt Ltd.

On finding that the Revenue has grossly erred by treating the element of interest on the alleged loan as bogus in nature, the Ahmedabad ITAT held that the loan amount cannot be made subject to addition under the provisions of section 68 of the Income tax Act, 1961, since loan was taken through banking channel and was repaid in the next year along with interest through banking channel and TDS was deducted on the interest.

Careless Attitude Of AO: Kolkata ITAT Deletes Addition Made Without Examining Nature Of Expenditure

Case Title: Ankit Impex Marketing Services Pvt. Ltd verses Income Tax Officer

On finding that expenses were incurred for the business purposes during the course of business, for which the assessee has submitted all basic details which was not cross verified by the AO, the Kolkata ITAT deleted the addition made by AO.

LTCG Not Eligible For Exemption U/s 10(38) If Claimed On Bogus Scrips: Ahmedabad ITAT

Case Title: Atmiben Aliptkumar Doshi verses The Income Tax Officer

On finding the scrips as non-genuine and bogus, the Ahmedabad ITAT confirms the Assessing Officer's and CIT(A)'s decision for denying the LTCG exemption under Section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

No Adjustment If Margin Falls Within Tolerance Range Of (+/-) 5% As Per Sec 92CA: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: ITO Verses M/s. Excult Client Services I P Ltd.

Finding that the margins of assessee company fell within the tolerance limit of +/-5% for AY 2005-06, the Mumbai ITAT deleted the ALP adjustments proposed by the TPO in ITEs as well as IT segments.

No Prima Facie Evidence To Prove Escapement: Delhi ITAT Quashes Reassessment Of Mauritian Entity

Case Title: AEP Investments (Mauritius) Ltd verses ACIT

Noting that the case has been reopened just because the assessee, i.e., a Mauritian investment company had made foreign remittance which arose from the sale of investments and there is no prima facie evidence to prove escapement of income, which is a pre-requisite for initiating reopening, the Delhi ITAT quashes reassessment proceedings initiated against the assessee.

No Taxability Arises During Current Year If Taxpayer Has Only Repatriated Amounts Invested In Earlier Years: Delhi ITAT

Case Title: BCP V Singapore FVCI P. Ltd Verses ACIT

Observing that the assessee has only repatriated the amounts invested in the earlier years and hence, no taxability arises during the year, the Delhi ITAT held that there is no escapement of income in the hands of assessee i.e., a Singaporean entity on repatriating Rs.203.56 Cr. arising from redemption of NCDs where Assessee did not file the ITR.

Capital Gains Tax Can Be Computed Separately Even In Case Of Consolidated Sale Of Land And Building, Confirms Rajkot ITAT

Case Title: M/s. L. N. Technocast Pvt. Ltd. Verses Income Tax Officer

The Rajkot ITAT held that Assessing Officer has not erred in computing separate capital gains tax in respect of sale of land (being Long Term Capital Gains) and sale of building / super structure (being Short Term Capital Gains), even if the assessee had made a consolidated sale of both land and building, as part of the same agreement.

Interest Income Earned From Co-Operative/ Scheduled Bank Eligible For Deduction U/s 80P(2): Pune ITAT

Case Title: Kolhapur District Central Co-op Bank Kanista Sevakanchi Sahakar Pat Sanstha Ltd. verses ITO

Relying on decisions of Supreme Court and High Court, the Pune ITAT directed the AO to allow the deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(d) of Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of interest income earned from co-operative bank/scheduled bank.

Genuineness Of Company Is Not Dependent On Magnitude Of Profit: Kolkata ITAT Upholds Disallowance Of LTCG

Case Title: Brajesh Narnolia verses Income Tax Officer

The Kolkata ITAT confirmed the CIT(A)'s order upholding disallowance of claim of long-term capital gain exemption u/s 10(38) of Income tax Act, 1961 by stating that genuineness of the company is not dependent on the magnitude of profit.

Meagre Control Over Companies Transacting In Penny Stock Is No Basis To Question Source Of Source Of Income: Delhi ITAT

Case Title: DCIT verses M/s Nishit Capinvest Pvt. Ltd.

On not finding any substance in the conclusion of AO that the source of source of income is tainted, the Delhi ITAT confirms the deletion of addition made u/s 68 of Income Tax Act.

Sec 50C(1) Is Anti-Avoidance Provision To Prevent Evasion Of Tax By Showing Lesser Consideration, Reiterates Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Rajpal Mehra verses ACIT

While setting aside the order passed by CIT(A) and emphasizing on the safe harbour limit, the Mumbai ITAT held that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of Section 50C of Income Tax Act, 1961.

No Addition Is Permitted U/s 69 I-T Act Once Source Of Investment Stands Proved: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax verses Rajmohan Appalacharya N. Chakravarty

On finding that none of requirements of section 69 regarding source of investment stands fulfilled, the Mumbai ITAT upheld the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition made by AO under said provision.

Discrepancy In Stock Sufficient Enough For Addition U/s 69B: Rajkot ITAT Confirms Estimation Of Gross Profit

Case Title: Raghuvanshi Cotton Ginning & Pressing Pvt. verses Addl. CIT

On finding that the AO has rightly estimated the gross profit after finding discrepancy in stock, the Rajkot ITATconfirmed the addition made u/s 69B of Income tax Act, 1961.

Taxpayer Deserves Opportunity To Furnish Additional Evidence If Critical To Issue, Before Completing Assessment U/s 144: Chandigarh ITAT

Case Title: Baba Kishan Dasss Education & Charitable Society Verses ITO

On finding lack of opportunities provided to Assessee and in interest of substantial justice, the Chandigarh ITATremanded the matter to the file of CIT(A) to examine the matter of exemption u/s 10(23C) of the Income tax Act, 1961 afresh.

'On-Money' No Basis To Make Addition On Sale Of House Property Sans Absence Of Reference To DVO U/s 55A: Ahmedabad ITAT

Case Title: Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax verses M/s. Aarya Developers

On finding that the AO has failed to refer the case to District Valuation Officer u/s 55A of Income Tax Act 1961, the Ahmedabad ITAT deleted the addition made by AO on account of on-money received by the assessee on the sale of duplex pent house.

Charging Nominal Sum For Functioning Educational Institution Not Commercial Activity: Indore ITAT Directs For Registration U/s 12AB

Case Title: Aarambh Foundation verses CIT

While allowing the Assessee's appeal for registration u/s 12AB, the Indore ITAT held that mere charging a nominal amount for smooth functioning of educational institution and trust cannot called to be a part of commercial activity, and therefore, directed the CIT(E) to grant registration u/s 12AB of Income Tax Act, 1961.

Voluntary Disallowance Of Expense U/s 40(A)(ia) Is No Basis To Treat Taxpayer As 'Assessee In Default' U/s 201(1): Delhi ITAT

Case Title: ACIT verses Artemis Medicares Services Ltd

On finding that voluntary disallowance of expense u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act is not a ground to treat the assessee as 'assessee in default' u/s 201(1), the Delhi ITAT deleted the addition of chargeable interest u/s 201(1A) as well as the treatment of 'assessee in default' u/s 201(1).

Investment Expenditure In Subsidiary Was Incurred For Business Expediency: Delhi ITAT Deletes Addition U/s 37 Of I-T Act

Case Title: ACIT verses Noida Cyber Park Pvt. Ltd.

On finding sufficient evidence for establishing that expenditure was incurred for business expediency, the Delhi ITAT deleted the addition made by AO u/s 36(1)(iii) and u/s 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Taxpayer Should Not Suffer For Non-Filing Of Material Evidences: Mumbai ITAT Admits Additional Evidence

Case Title: Rajesh Lakhmshi Nisar verses ITO

While setting aside the order u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed by CIT(A), the Mumbai ITAT restored the entire disputed issues to the AO along with the additional evidence to decide the case afresh on merits, so that the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing.

Investments Which Yielded Exempt Income Can Only Be Considered For Purpose Of Disallowance U/s 14A R/w Rule 8D: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Reliance Power Ltd verses The Deputy Commissioner of income tax

Quoting the decision of cargo motors private limited versus deputy Commissioner of income tax (145 taxmann.com 641), the Mumbai ITAT reiterated that for purpose of making disallowance of expenses u/s 14A as per rule 8D, only those investments were to be considered which yielded exempt income during the year.

Interest Income Derived By Co-Operative Society From Its Investment With Any Other Co-Operative Society Is Allowable U/s 80P(2)(D): Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Reserve Bank Staff and Officers co-op credit society Ltd. verses Income Tax Officer

While directing the AO to allow deduction u/s 80P(2)(a) or 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 of interest income earned by the assessee from the co-operative bank, the Mumbai ITAT clarified that co-operatives bank is also a co-operative society.

Investments In Mutual Funds Not A Basis To Conclude Activities Of Trust Are Not Genuine: Pune ITAT Restores Registration U/S 12A

Case Title: Mr. & Mrs. S.M. Batha Education Trust verses CIT(Exemption)

On finding that entire proceeding was based on the covenants of the trust deed but not on the actual activities carried out by the appellant trust, the Pune ITAT set aside the order passed by CIT(E) cancelling the registration granted u/s 12AB(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Proceedings Under Remand Passed Without Application Of Mind: Delhi ITAT Deletes Addition Made By ITO

Case Title: Shiv Kumar Nayyar verses DCIT

On finding that I-T Authorities had passed the same order which was earlier remanded, without proper application of mind, the New Delhi ITAT deleted the addition made by the ITOs.

Annual Letting Value Of Unsold Flats Held As Stock In Trade Cannot Be Considered For Addition U/s 22 I-T Act: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: M/s Shamdarshan Properties Pvt Ltd verses DCIT

While setting aside the order of CIT(A), the Mumbai ITAT directed the AO to delete the addition of annual letting out value (ALV) of the unsold flat u/s 22 of Income Tax Act, 1961.

Cash Deposit In Bank Account Made Out Of Sale Proceeds Received In Cash If Duly Explained, Is Not Unexplained Credit: Delhi ITAT

Case Title: Siddharth Mehta verses ITO

Accepting the explanation given by the assessee that he had received cash on sale of property to be believable which was faithfully deposited in the bank account within a short period, the Delhi ITAT provided relief to the assessee against the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Additions Made By AO Once Deleted By Appellate Authority With Reasoned Order, Merits Status Quo In Identical Cases: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax verses Ms Speco Infrastructure

Relying upon the decisions of the Co-ordinate Bench, the Mumbai ITAT upheld the decision of CIT(A) in deleting the addition made u/s 68 read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Statutory Scheme Permits Allowance Of Deduction U/s 80P Only If It Is Made In Return Filed Within Time Prescribed U/s 139(1): Bangalore ITAT

Case Title: Madhu Souharda Pathina Sahakari Niyamitha verses Income Tax Officer

On finding that failure on the part of assessee to comply with the pre-condition for obtaining the deduction cannot be condoned either by the statutory authorities or by the courts, the Bangalore ITAT ruled that the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s. 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Loans Given By Co-Operative Banks To Their Nominal Members Qualify For Deduction U/s 80P(2)(A)(I), Reiterates Bangalore ITAT

Case Title: M/s. Charvaka Seva Sahakari Bank Ltd. verses Income Tax Officer

While considering the definition of 'member' under the Kerala Act, as per which loans given to nominal members would qualify for purpose of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Bangalore ITAT directed the AO to grant relief to the assessee by allowing the claim of deduction under said provision.

Revisionary Authority Could Not Exercise Jurisdiction U/s 263 When Larger Issue Was Pending Before CIT(A): Chennai ITAT

Case Title: M/s. Golden Vats Private Limited verses ACIT

The Chennai ITAT held that the impugned revision u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was bad-in-law and liable to be quashed, while pointing that when larger issue was pending before CIT(A), the revisionary authority could not exercise jurisdiction u/s 263.

Failure To Furnish Segmental Information U/s 92D By Diamond Trader Is No Basis To Levy Penalty U/s 271G: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: ACIT verses M/s. Eurostar Diamonds India Pvt Ltd.

On finding that transfer pricing adjustment made in the Arm's Length Price to be erroneous, the Mumbai ITAT deleted the penalty u/s 271G of Income Tax Act, 1961 for non-furnishing of requisite information u/s 92D.

For Computing Presumptive Income U/s 44BB, Service Tax Collected For Rendering Services Does Not Form Part Of Gross Receipts: Kolkata ITAT

Case Title: Cathay Pacific airways Limited verses Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

The Kolkata ITAT recently ruled that service tax is not an amount paid or received for the services rendered by it, when the assessee is only collecting the service tax for passing it on to the Government account.

Management Fee On ECB Partakes Character Of 'Interest' U/s 2(28A), Hence Exempt Under Art.11 Of Indo Germany DTAA: Delhi ITAT

Case Title: Aka Ausfuhrrkreditgesellschaft Mbh Verses The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

The Delhi ITAT ruled that management fee received by the non-resident taxpayer bank for extending ECB to an Indian entity is not taxable as fee for technical services (FTS) since it partakes the character of interest under Section 2(28A).

Reassessment Proceedings Initiated On Account Of Change Of Opinion Merits To Be Quashed: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Verses East West Pipeline Private Limited

While confirming the CIT(A)'s order quashing the reassessment order, the Mumbai ITAT held that the reassessment proceedings were initiated on account of change of opinion formed on re-appraisal of the facts already on record and examined during the regular assessment proceedings.

Mumbai ITAT Upholds Exemption Granted On LTCG Upon Sale Of Equity Shares Of Indian Entity Holding Valid TRC

Case Title: Comstar Mauritius Limited Verses CIT

The Mumbai ITAT upheld the exemption of long-term capital gain granted to the Assessee, holding a valid Tax Residency Certificate (TRC), under Article 13 of India-Mauritius DTAA, on sale of equity shares of an Indian company, acquired prior to April 01, 2017.

Taxpayer Cannot Be Denied Benefit Of Sec 80IB If Audit Report & Form 3CB Was Not Uploaded Due To Technical Glitch In E-Filing: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: M/s. S.K. Ventures verses DCIT

While remanding the matter for fresh disposal of assessee's claim u/s 80IB of Income Tax Act, 1961 in the wake of new admissible evidence, the Mumbai ITAT directed the AO to consider the audit report u/s 44AB along with Form 3CB.

ITR Dues Claims Shall Stand Extinguished Upon Approval Of Resolution Plan If They Were Not Part Of RP, Reiterates Nagpur ITAT

Case Title: Murli Industries Ltd. verses DCIT

Referring to the decision of Apex Court in the case of Ghanashyam Mishra And Sons vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction (2021) 126 taxmann.com 132 (SC), the Nagpur ITAT found that all the claims are not part of the Resolution Plan and hence dismissed the appeal filed against the orders of National Faceless Appeal Centre.

Method Of Revenue Recognition Adopted By Taxpayer And ITO In Earlier & Later Years Cannot Be Disturbed Sans Any Modification: Ahmedabad ITAT

Case Title: Ralsons Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. verses PCIT

The Ahmedabad ITAT held that once a method of recognizing the revenue adopted by the assessee and accepted by the revenue in the earlier and later years, the same cannot be disturbed for the intervening year i.e. the year in dispute until and unless initial year is made subject to the modification.

Only Obvious & Patent Mistake Can Be Subjected To Rectification Proceedings U/s 154: Bangalore ITAT

Case Title: Town Vividodesha Sahakari Bhandara Niyamitha verses The Income Tax Officer

The Bangalore ITAT held that the CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the order of the AO passed u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, on finding that the issue raised in the appeal is not a mistake apparent on record.

Cash Deposit During Demonetization Can't Be Taxed As Unexplained U/S 69A If Source Is Explained: Ahmedabad ITAT

Case Title: Amikrupa Education Trust verses ITO

The Ahmedabad ITAT held that the AO as well as the CIT(A) was not right in making the addition of cash deposits amounting to Rs. 49,80,000/- in bank account during the demonetization period by invoking section 69A of the Income tax Act, as the assessee has fully explained the cash deposits and thus the same cannot be treated as unexplained money.

No Question Of Invoking Sec 201(1)/201(1A) if Taxpayer Has Deducted TDS At Appropriate Rates: Rajkot ITAT

Case Title: Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd verses Deputy CIT

Noting that assessee has also furnished tabular chart along with supporting documents to demonstrate that TDS at appropriate rates has been deducted on such trade discount / commission given to it's agents, the Rajkot ITAT held that assessee cannot be held as in default for not deducting TDS.

ITR Reflecting PAN, Bank Statement & Confirmation Of Creditors Duly Adduced: Delhi ITAT Deletes Addition Based On Unsecured Loan

Case Title: ACIT verses M/s. Dayal Steel P. Ltd

On finding that AO has rejected the evidences furnished by the assessee relating to bank statement and confirmation of the creditors, without establishing any falsity in the same, the Delhi ITAT deleted the addition made by AO u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Sec 68 Can Be Invoked Only If Taxpayer Fails To Explain Amount Found Credited In Its Books: Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: ITO verses M/s. WinstarEComPvt. Ltd

The Mumbai ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s order to delete the addition made u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 finding no unexplained cash credit in the books of assessee.

CIT(A) Merely Upholding AO's Action Without Considering Merits Of Case, Amounts To Non-Compliance Of Sec 250(6): Mumbai ITAT

Case Title: Rajkumar Anandchand Jain verses Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

In the interest of natural justice, the Mumbai ITAT restored the appeal of assessee back to the CIT with a direction to the assessee that as soon as the window is available for submission of details by the CIT(A), assessee must submit the detail within the prescribed time which is to be decided on merits of addition under section 56 (2) (x) (b) of the Income tax Act, 1961.

Nature Of Business Alone Is No Justification For Disallowance On Ad Hoc Basis, Without Pointing Any Deficiency In Books: New Delhi ITAT

Case Title: Zheng Yuan Mobiles Pvt. Ltd. verses DCIT

On finding that without pointing out anything specific defect on wholesome basis, certain part of the expenses has been discarded on estimate basis, the New Delhi ITAT deleted the addition made by AO.

Merely Making Incorrect Claim Does Not Tantamount To Furnishing Inaccurate Particulars: Mumbai ITAT Deletes Penalty U/s 271(1)(C)

Case Title: Eureka Outsourcing Solutions Pvt Ltd verses Dy CIT

Referring to the decision of Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products Pvt Ltd, the Mumbai ITAT reiterated that for the purpose of levying penalty, the provisions of the Income tax Act to be strictly covered and that merely making an incorrect claim does not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars.

A Trust Is Not Barred From Getting Approval U/S 80G In Future Because It Has Not Opted For It Previously: Kolkata ITAT

Case Title: Diamond Cares verses CIT (Exemption)

The Kolkata ITAT ruled that simply because a trust/charitable institution has not opted for getting benefits under the Income-tax Act, then such institution is not barred in future from applying from registration/approval under the relevant provisions.

Funds Received By Charitable Trust Under Swachh Bharat Abhiyan In Fiduciary Capacity Is Not Their Income: New Delhi ITAT

Case Title: DCIT verses M/s. Sewa-THDC

On finding that the assessee society is not the owner of the funds but holding the same in fiduciary capacity, the New Delhi ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision in deleting the addition made by AO of the funds received by assessee under “Swach Bharat Abhiyan”.

Proviso To Sec 80IA(12) Applies Only In Case Of Transfer Of Operation & Maintenance Of Industrial Park, Clarifies Chennai ITAT

Case Title: Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax verses M/s. Olympia Tech Park (Chennai) Private Limited

Referring to CBDT Circular no. 10/2014, the Chennai ITAT emphasized that if an undertaking is transferred to another undertaking other than by way of amalgamation and demerger and in other cases, the transferee undertaking shall be eligible for deduction for remaining unexpired period u/s 80IA(4)(iii) of the Income Tax Act.

Requirement Of 'Commencement Of Activity' Does Not Apply To Trusts Already Started Charitable Activity Before Obtaining Provisional Registration: Pune ITAT

Case Title: T B Lulla Charitable Foundation verses The CIT Exemption

Finding that the Assessee Trust had applied for registration within the time allowed under the Income Tax Act, the Pune ITAT directed the CIT(E) to treat the application being filed within statutory time after verifying assessee's eligibility for deduction u/s 80IA(4) as per act.

Profit Element Embedded In Unexplained Sales Can Only Be Treated As Undisclosed: Rajkot ITAT

Case Title: ACIT verses Conor Granito P. Ltd

While rejecting the estimation of profit at 12.5% deduced by AO on account of undisclosed sales, the Rajkot ITAT held that there has to be a reasonable basis for applying a particular net profit rate in each case.

Income Tax Not Payable On Services Rendered Abroad By Non-Resident Deputed By Indian Employer: ITAT

Case Title: Devi Dayal Versus The DCIT/ACIT

The Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the income tax is not payable on services rendered abroad by non-residents deputed by Indian employers.

OYO Not Liable To Deduct TDS On Minimum Guarantee Payments Made To Hotels: ITAT

Case Title: M/s Oravel Stays Pvt Ltd. Versus The A.C.I.T

The Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the assessee OYO is not liable for TDS under Section 194C of the Income Tax Act on the minimum guarantee payments made to hotels.

Stamp Value As On Date Of Agreement Of Sale Of Property Has To Be Considered For Applicability Of Section 56(2)(vii)(b): ITAT

Case Title: Shyamkumar Madhavdas Chugh Versus The ACIT

The Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that stamp value as on the date of agreement of sale of the property, in the year 2010 (i.e., Rs. 1.4 Cr), has to be considered for the applicability of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act.

TDS Can't Be Isolatedly Taken In Any Assessment Year Without Offering Corresponding Income For Taxation: ITAT

Case Title: DCIT Versus Cicon Engineers Private Limited

The Bangalore Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the TDS cannot be isolatedly taken in any assessment year without offering the corresponding income for taxation.

Possession Of Transport Vehicles Is Sufficient Than Legal Ownership For S. 194C-TDS Exception: ITAT

Case Title: Adhunik Khanan VA Parivahan Theka Sahakari Samiti Limited Versus ITO

The Jodhpur Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the assessee, the legal owner, is not required to TDS under Section 194C, where a declaration under Section 194C(6) along with a PAN is obtained from the payees who are in possession of the vehicle, though they are not registered owners.

Notion Of Earning 90% Profit Is Unimaginable, Is Contractual Loot Under Guise Of Alleged Development Activities: ITAT

Case Title: Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. LEPL Projects Limited

The Hyderabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the notion of earning 90% profit is unimaginable and is contractual loot under the guise of alleged development activities.

Delivery Cost And Warranty Expenses Are Post Sales Activities Doesn't Form The Part Of AMP Expenditure For Amazon India: ITAT

Case Title: Amazon Seller Services Private Limited Versus The Commissioner of Income-Tax (TP)

The Bangalore Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that delivery costs and warranty expenses are not part of advertising, marketing, and promotion (AMP) expenditures.

Case Title: Indian National Congress Verses Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

While holding the argument that an assessee is entitled to a stay on the recovery proceedings on payment of 20% of the demand during the pendency of appeal before the Tribunal, as too general, the New Delhi ITAT dismisses the stay application of Indian National Congress treating it as meritless.

Case Title: Bagora Developers vs ACIT

Case Title: DCIT verses Umang Hiralal Thakkar

Case Title: Bharat Engineering Construction Co. Pvt Ltd versus ACIT

Case Title: Brightstar Vincom Pvt Ltd versus ITO

Case Title: Canara Bank vs ACIT

Case Title: C. Doctor & Co. Pvt Ltd verses ACIT

Case Title: Pairagacha Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. verses Income Tax Officer

Case Title: RSWM Ltd. versus DCIT

Case Title: Satya Kiran Healthcare Private Ltd. versus ITO

Case Title: Sanjay Kukreja verses ACIT

Case Title: Santiniketan Sishutirtha verses Commissioner of Income Tax

The Bangalore ITAT set aside the order passed by CIT(A) for providing relief u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) and 115BBE of Income Tax Act, 1961 and redirect the case back to the file of AO for reconsideration of the genuineness of the deposit during demonetization by the assessee.

Capital Gains On Silver Articles Wrongly Estimated By I-T Authorities: Chennai ITAT Deletes Addition & Penalty Levied U/s 271(1)(C)

Case Title: Padam J. Challani verses ACIT

On finding that lower authorities had erred in computing the estimated gain on silver articles, the Chennai ITAT deleted the addition made by CIT(A) and levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Investments Yielding Tax Exempt Income Can Only Be Considered For Computing Disallowance Under Rule 8D(2)(iii): Kolkata ITAT

Case Title: Soyuz Trading Co. Ltd verses DCIT

Abiding by the principle of judicial hierarchy and binding precedent, the Kolkata ITAT directed the AO to consider only the investments yielding tax exempt income for computation of disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Income Tax Rules 1962.

Genuineness & Veracity Of Party Can't Be Doubted To Make Addition U/s 69 Merely Because Rent Was Received In Cash: Delhi ITAT

Case Title: DCIT verses Suboli Ice and Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd.

Case Title: Udayan Grover verses National Faceless Appeal Centre

Case Title: DCIT verses Umang Hiralal Thakkar

Case Title: Ultimate Creations verses ACIT

Case Title: Vishram Sahakari Awas Samiti Limited verses ITO

Case Title: Altisource Business Solutions Private Ltd vs DCIT

Case Title: Mukesh Harilal Mehta verses Income Tax Officer

Case Title: Ms. Padma Rao verses C.I.T

Case Title: DCIT verses Delight Suppliers Pvt. Ltd.

Case Title: Daya Rani verses CIT

Case Title: Dimexon Diamonds Ltd vs ACIT

Case Title: Corteva Agriscience Services India Pvt. Ltd vs DCIT

Case Title: ACIT verses Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Case Title: ACIT vs ITC Infotech India Limited

Case Title: Amazon Seller Services Private Limited verses CIT

Case Title: Rakhmabai Mhatre verses Income Tax Officer

Case Title: Dahisar Traders verses ITO

Case Title: ACIT verses Aaryavart Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd

Case Title: Anamika Kala Sangam verses Deputy CIT

Case Title: Anjana Foundation Vadodara verses AO

Case Title: Arcserve India Software Solution Pvt. Ltd. verses ACIT

Case Title: Konkan Education Society Sevak Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd. verses Income Tax Officer

Case Title: Manphool Singh verses Income Tax Officer

Case Title: M/s A.P Knit Fab verses DCIT

Finding that the difference in stock found out by I-T Authorities has no independent identity and is part & parcel of entire stock, the Chandigarh ITAT refused to treat such difference as undeclared business income and clarified that it cannot be said that there is an undisclosed asset which existed independently.

Case Title: Aashirvad Villa Limited verses ITO

The Kolkata ITAT held the intimation passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(1) and proceeding on such intimation to be bad in law, as the same was passed without granting any reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Case Title: ACIT verses M/s Ace Trexim Pvt Ltd

The Kolkata ITAT recently clarified that mere information regarding transfer of funds is no basis to conduct reassessment once the source of such transfer was sufficiently established through the banking channel.

Case Title: AL A S Real Estate and Developers Private Ltd Verses Pr. CIT

While holding the revision-order passed by PCIT as invalid, the Indore ITAT recently clarified that I-T authorities cannot punish the assessee by merely saying that the payee has not filed income-tax return.

Case Title: DCIT verses Shri Bharatkumar Babubhai Patel

On finding no infirmity in the order passed by the CIT(A), the Ahmedabad ITAT confirmed that rights held by the assessee as a Confirming Party in the Sale Deed is a capital asset within the meaning of Section 2(14) and liable for LTCG and the assessee is also eligible to claim deduction u/s. 54B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Case Title: Shantaben Fathechand Mehta verses Income-tax Officer

Referring to Article 265 of the Constitution of India, the Mumbai ITAT remanded the case to the file of AO with direction to verify factual aspects, pertaining to the purchase of the shares in consideration and re-compute the liability accordingly.

Case Title: Shripal Sheshmal Jain HUF verses Income Tax Officer

On finding that AO as well as the CIT(A) was not right in making/confirming the addition on account of unaccounted business income, the Ahmedabad ITAT deleted the addition made by AO under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Case Title: DCIT verses M/s Claris Lifesciences Limited

The Ahmedabad ITAT ruled that when the period of holding of the plant and machinery is more than 36 months, then the same has to be treated as long-term capital asset in pursuant to the provisions of section 2(42A) of the Income tax Act.

Case Title: Apeejay Surrendra Management Services Pvt Ltd. verses DCIT

Since the income accrues or arises or is deemed to accrue or arise in the hands of KSWPL and not in the hands of the assessee, the Kolkata ITAT held that by invoking second limb of section 2(22)(e) of the Income tax Act, accrual of income and its taxability cannot be held to be in the hands of the assessee.

Case Title: Soham Buildcon verses PCIT

On finding that there is no prejudice against the Revenue and the twin conditions to exercise the power u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 have not been satisfied, the Ahmedabad ITAT set aside the order of PCIT to assess the assessee's case freshly.

Case Title: Aniljit Singh Arora verses DCIT

Finding that the nature and source of unaccounted investment in the hospital building is arising out of assessee's professional receipts, the Chandigarh ITAT ruled that there was no justifiable basis on the part of the AO in applying the provisions of Section 69 r/w Section 115BBE of the Income tax Act to the surrendered business income of the assessee which has been duly offered in the return of income.

Case Title: Sri Arijit Chakraborty verses ITO

Upon not finding justification on the part of the Income Tax Authorities in computing the capital gains by adopting the sale value as per the value estimated by the Departmental Valuation Officer, theKolkata ITAT deleted the addition made by the AO in respect of capital gains by adopting the value of the property as per the DVO report.

Case Title: Aryavrat Vintrade Pvt Ltd verses ITO

Since the AO as well as the CIT(A) has not examined the issue with the angle of section 69, rather they took the conditions of section 68 where unexplained cash credit is required to be explained by the assessee and applied on the issue of investment, the Kolkata ITAT remanded the matter for re-adjudication.

Case Title: Bisharpara Kodalia Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. verses ITO

The Kolkata ITAT ruled that section 80AC of the Income tax Act puts a bar against claiming of deduction in respect of certain income provided under the head (C) of Chapter VIA which includes section 80P of the Act also if the return of income are not filed before the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act.

Case Title: DCIT verses Continental Corrugators Pvt. Ltd.

Finding that the book value of assets and liabilities adopted for the purposes of NAV method of valuation is in consonance with last audited balance-sheet items, the Delhi ITAT clarified that the AO has misdirected himself on seeking valuation report which requirement do not emanate from the law codified in this regard.

Case Title: Debarghya Chattopadhaya verses DCIT

Finding that the Appellant/ Assessee has valid Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) for United Kingdom, the Kolkata ITATreiterated that the salary income received by assessee for his work during stay at United Kingdom is exempt from tax on account of treaty benefit.

Case Title: ITO verses Surender Dalal

On finding that the requirement of application of mind is missing in the instant case, the Delhi ITATheld that the reassessment made in the section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is bad in law and hence, the re-assessment order is quashed.

Case Title: Babubhai Ramanbhai Patel verses Deputy CIT

The Ahmedabad ITAT emphasized that as per Section 250 of the Income tax Act, it is incumbent on the CIT(A) to make necessary enquiry before passing the order and he is obliged to decide each of the points arising out of the appeal i.e. grounds on merits have to be discussed even in an ex-parte order.

Case Title: M/s B Narayan Associates verses CIT

Referring to the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Principal CIT vs Mohammed Haji Adam & Co (Income Tax Appeal No.1004 of 2016 dated 11/02/2019), the Mumbai ITAT reiterated that the additions should be limited to the extent of the G.P. rate on purchases at the same rate of other genuine purchases.

Case Title: ACIT verses Dhruv Milkose Pvt. Ltd.

Recently, the Delhi ITAT reiterated that object of deeming an unjustified premium charged on issue of share as taxable income u/s 56(2)(viib) of the Income tax Act is wholly inapplicable for transactions between holding and its subsidiary company where no income can be said to accrue to the ultimate beneficiary, i.e., holding company.

Case Title: Asha Modern Educational Society vs ITO

The New Delhi ITAT emphasized that the Revenue Authorities have to tax the right person in right manner and shall not disallow the eligible deductions on mere technicalities.

Case Title: M/s Hotel Centre Point, Shillong Versus ITO

The Guwahati Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the exemption under Section 10(26) of the Income Tax Act has been specifically conferred on members of the Scheduled Tribe residing in the specified area. The exemption cannot be extended to another separate and distinct "person," that is, the partnership firm, though such a firm consists of the individual partners who, in their individual capacities, are entitled to such an exemption.

Case Title: Mukesh Harilal Mehta Versus Income Tax Officer

The Mumbai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that tax benefits cannot be denied to taxpayers due to an error made by the builder in assigning the apartment.

Case Title: MARC Laboratories Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Finding that value determined by the DVO is less than the valuation adopted by assessee for computing fair market value (FMV), the Chennai ITAT ruled that the value adopted by the DVO cannot be taken for computing FMV.

Incorrect calculation by AO Is Not 'Failure On Part Of Taxpayer To Disclose Material Fact', For Initiating Reopening: Ahmedabad ITAT

The Ahmedabad ITAT ruled that mathematical incorrectness by AO cannot be said to be failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any material fact, so as to initiate reopening of assessment.

Once Insurance Policy Is Assigned By Employer To Employee, Value Received By Employee Can't Be Taxed In View Of Sec 10(10D): Delhi ITAT

The New Delhi ITAT recently reiterated that once insurance policy is assigned by the employer to employee, the insurance policy gets converted into an ordinary policy, and in that case, the value received by employee would not be subjected to tax in view of section 10(10D) of the Act.

Vehicle Commercially Used For Purpose Of Business Of Company, Eligible For Benefit Of Depreciation : Ahmedabad ITAT

Relying on the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Asian Mills (P.) Ltd., the Ahmedabad ITAT that vehicle exclusively used by an entity for its commercial purpose becomes eligible for claim of depreciation.

Revisionary Jurisdiction U/s 263 Can't Be Invoked If AO Has Formed Plausible View After Carrying Out Necessary Enquiry: Chandigarh ITAT

Finding that the assessee has carried out seasonal trade in hosiery items duly supported by documentary evidence, which was duly examined by the AO accepting the said transactions and resultant profit has been brought to tax, the Chandigarh ITAT held that the PCIT cannot be permitted to invoke his jurisdiction u/s 263 merely because he believes that there is certain deficiency in the documentation so maintained and furnished by the assessee.

ITAT Restores Matter Back To AO To Verify ICSI's Income Tax Exemption Claim

Case Title: The Institute of Company Secretaries of India Versus DCIT

The Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has restored the matter back to the AO to verify the Institute of Company Secretaries of India's (ICSI) income tax exemption claim.