Loading ITAT cases…
124 orders · Page 3 of 3
The Tribunal found that the ground regarding Section 80P(4) was not applicable as it was not the AO's basis for denial. Regarding the main issue, the Tribunal noted conflicting High Court decisions and the Supreme Court's ruling in Totgar's case. It restored the issue to the AO for a fresh decision after examining facts in light of these judgments.
The Tribunal held that the revised return, filed beyond the time limit, was non est in law. However, it considered the revised return as valid material for assessment as the assessee had voluntarily admitted these items as taxable income after being confronted by the AO.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The AO is directed to provide the assessee with all relied-upon documents and allow for cross-examination of deponents.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the AO for de novo adjudication. The AO was directed to provide the assessee with all relied-upon documents and allow cross-examination of deponents.
The Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for de novo adjudication. The AO was directed to provide the assessee with all relied-upon documents and allow cross-examination of persons whose statements were used for the addition.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The AO is directed to provide the assessee with all relied-upon documents and allow cross-examination of persons whose statements are being used.
The Tribunal held that 'other income' is eligible for exemption under Section 10A, following a Full Bench decision of the Karnataka High Court. It also held that telecommunication and insurance expenditure incurred in foreign currency for export of software should be reduced from both export turnover and total turnover.
The Tribunal held that 'other income' is eligible for exemption under Section 10A, following a Full Bench decision of the Karnataka High Court. It also held that telecommunication and insurance expenditure incurred in foreign currency for export of software should be reduced from both export turnover and total turnover.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO was directed to provide the assessee with all relied-upon documents, allow rebuttal, and provide an opportunity for cross-examination.
The Tribunal upheld the additions, stating that the assessee failed to discharge its onus of proving the genuineness and creditworthiness of creditors. It also confirmed the addition for suppressed sales, citing the assessee's failure to provide a plausible explanation for the lower sale consideration.
The Tribunal held that the PCIT's revisionary action under Section 263 was untenable. The Tribunal found that the twin conditions of the assessment order being erroneous and prejudicial to revenue were not satisfied for the issues raised by the PCIT.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The AO was directed to provide the assessee with all relied-upon documents for rebuttal and allow cross-examination of persons whose statements were used.
The Tribunal held that the alleged rental income could not be taxed as the assessee had denied its receipt and provided corroborating affidavits. The Tribunal also allowed the deduction for excise license fees as the assessee had produced challans and the accounts were audited.
The Tribunal held that the alleged rental income could not be taxed as the assessee had denied its receipt and provided corroborating affidavits. The Tribunal also allowed the deduction for excise license fees as the assessee had produced challans and the accounts were audited.
The Tribunal held that the CIT was not justified in exercising revisionary powers under Section 263 as the assessee had demonstrated that the issues were examined by the AO or did not warrant further additions. The CIT failed to provide concrete findings that the assessment order was erroneous.
The Tribunal held that payments for the right to use software licenses are in the nature of royalty and attract TDS provisions. Consequently, the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for failure to deduct tax at source was upheld.
The Tribunal held that 'other income' is eligible for exemption under Section 10A, following a Full Bench decision of the Karnataka High Court. It also held that telecommunication and insurance expenditure incurred in foreign currency for export of software should be reduced from both export turnover and total turnover.
The Tribunal held that the alleged rental income could not be taxed as the assessee had denied its receipt and provided corroborating affidavits. The Tribunal also allowed the deduction for excise license fees as the assessee had produced challans and the accounts were audited.
The Tribunal found the Assessing Officer's premise for addition to be wrong, as Form 26AS reflects purchase turnover, not sales turnover. However, the assessee's explanation regarding M/s. Manjusri Wines lacked evidence. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for further verification.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication. The AO is directed to provide the assessee with all relied-upon documents for rebuttal and allow cross-examination of persons whose statements are used.
The Tribunal noted the assessee's consistent non-appearance and inferred a lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. Applying the principle that law aids the vigilant, the Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeal.
The Tribunal followed a previous decision which held that M/s. Megasoft Ltd. should be considered a good comparable after segmentation. Therefore, the Assessing Officer/Transfer Pricing Officer was directed to consider M/s. Megasoft Ltd. as a comparable after segmentation of its results.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication. The AO is directed to provide the assessee with all relied-upon documents and allow for cross-examination of deponents.
The Tribunal noted that the issue was resolved under MAP, with a specific agreement on arm's length price calculations. The case was sent back to the TPO for verification and to pass an order in accordance with the MAP resolution.