Loading ITAT cases…
115 orders · Page 3 of 3
The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)'s order as the assessee had not presented its case effectively at any level. The CIT(A) had made additions based on the lack of substantiation from the assessee.
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) decided the issue without examining the applicability of specific clauses of AS-2 regarding exclusions from inventory cost. Therefore, the matter was set aside for a fresh, reasoned decision.
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was cryptic and factually incorrect regarding the non-submission of confirmations. The matter was set aside and restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh, reasoned decision.
The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable due to the low tax effect. The Learned DR of the Revenue could not provide any justification for filing the appeal.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that a search had indeed taken place in the appellant's premises. The Tribunal noted the appellant's failure to object to the 153A proceedings before the AO and their lack of evidence to rebut the findings.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that a search had indeed taken place in the appellant's premises. The Tribunal noted the appellant's failure to object to the 153A proceedings before the AO and their lack of evidence to rebut the findings.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that a search had indeed taken place in the appellant's premises. The Tribunal noted the appellant's failure to object to the 153A proceedings before the AO and their lack of evidence to rebut the findings.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that a search had indeed taken place in the appellant's premises. The Tribunal noted the appellant's failure to object to the 153A proceedings before the AO and their lack of evidence to rebut the findings.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that a search had indeed taken place in the appellant's premises. The Tribunal noted the appellant's failure to object to the 153A proceedings before the AO and their lack of evidence to rebut the findings.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that a search had indeed taken place in the appellant's premises. The Tribunal noted the appellant's failure to object to the 153A proceedings before the AO and their lack of evidence to rebut the findings.
The Tribunal held that the addition was not justified as the assessee was not allowed to cross-examine the third party whose statement was relied upon. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal found that it was unclear how much expenditure was directly or indirectly related to earning exempted income. Both parties agreed to send the matter back to the AO for re-examination.
The Tribunal decided several issues, including those related to bad debts, provisions under Section 36(1)(viia), and depreciation on HTM securities. The Tribunal allowed some grounds for the assessee and dismissed grounds for the revenue in multiple assessment years.
The Tribunal held that for computing income from life insurance business under Section 44 of the Act, the surplus/deficit from the policyholders' account can be aggregated with the surplus/deficit of the shareholders' account. This decision followed previous rulings in the assessee's own cases.
The Tribunal found that it was unclear how much expenditure was directly or indirectly related to earning exempted income. Both parties agreed to send the matter back to the AO for re-examination.