ITAT Chennai Judgments — August 2019

The Tribunal, following a CBDT circular and a Supreme Court decision, held that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/- should be dismissed. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal held that the disallowance under the third limb of Rule 8D(2)(iii) is a mandatory requirement under the law. Since the assessee received dividend income, some administrative expenses are expected, and the disallowance of Rs. 4,16,367/- was confirmed.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, relying on its own previous order in the assessee's own case for a prior assessment year. The Tribunal stated that the pendency of a High Court appeal does not necessitate a different view.

The Tribunal held that the lower authorities had not examined the details filed by the assessee. To ensure principles of natural justice, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision after considering the assessee's details.

The ITAT found that the CIT(A) had not adjudicated the issues on merits and had passed an ex-parte order without examining the grounds of appeal. Therefore, the ITAT set aside the order and remitted the issues back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

The Tribunal held that the assessee was not given a fair opportunity to prove the genuineness of the transactions. The assessment was based on Revenue's investigation without providing the assessee an opportunity to rebut the evidence or cross-examine witnesses.

The Tribunal directed the CIT(E) to verify if the application was indeed filed electronically. If confirmed, registration under Section 12AA should be granted if the trust is otherwise eligible.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as not pressed/not maintainable, citing CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 which mandates that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50 lakhs should not be filed. The issues raised were left open for future proceedings.

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable as the tax effect was less than the monetary limit prescribed by the relevant circular. Therefore, the appeal could not survive.

The Tribunal held that since the investigation report was not furnished to the assessee, the matter needs to be re-examined by the Assessing Officer. The orders of the lower authorities were set aside.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, noting that the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 for filing appeals. The issues raised were left open for future proceedings.

The Tribunal, following a CBDT circular and a Supreme Court decision, held that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/- should be dismissed. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal, following a CBDT circular and a Supreme Court decision, held that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/- should be dismissed. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal held that the lower authorities had not examined the details filed by the assessee. To ensure principles of natural justice, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision after considering the assessee's details.

The Tribunal, following a CBDT circular and a Supreme Court decision, held that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/- should be dismissed. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal, following a CBDT circular and a Supreme Court decision, held that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/- should be dismissed. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal, following a CBDT circular and a Supreme Court decision, held that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/- should be dismissed. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without adjudicating the issues on merits. To ensure principles of natural justice, the assessee was granted one more opportunity.

The Tribunal held that the PCIT's order under Section 263 was unsustainable as the PCIT did not conduct independent inquiries to establish the assessment order was erroneous. Remanding the matter for further inquiry by the Assessing Officer was not permissible under Section 263.

The Revenue's appeal was dismissed due to low tax effect as per CBDT circular. The assessee's cross-objection was allowed for statistical purposes, remitting the issue of disallowance under Section 14A back to the Assessing Officer for re-examination.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT circular is binding on the Department's officers. Therefore, the Revenue could not proceed with these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT circular is binding on the Department's officers. Therefore, the Revenue could not proceed with these appeals.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT circular is binding on the Department's officers. Therefore, the Revenue could not proceed with these appeals.

The Tribunal noted that CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 mandates that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50 lakhs should not be filed. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT circular is binding on the Department's officers. Therefore, the Revenue could not proceed with these appeals.

The Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue, following the CBDT circular which mandates not to file or press appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/-. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue, following the CBDT circular which mandates not to file or press appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/-. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue, following the CBDT circular which mandates not to file or press appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/-. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue, following the CBDT circular which mandates not to file or press appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/-. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal decided to dismiss all appeals as withdrawn, following a CBDT circular that mandates not filing or pressing appeals where the tax effect is below a certain threshold. This decision was also supported by a Supreme Court ruling.

The Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue, following the CBDT circular which mandates not to file or press appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/-. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue, following the CBDT circular which mandates not to file or press appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50,00,000/-. The related cross-objections were also dismissed as infructuous.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal decided to dismiss all appeals as withdrawn, following a CBDT circular that mandates not filing or pressing appeals where the tax effect is below a certain threshold. This decision was also supported by a Supreme Court ruling.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal held that the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, which mandates withdrawal of appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 50 lakhs, is binding on the Revenue's officers. Therefore, the appeals could not proceed.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal decided to dismiss all appeals as withdrawn, following a CBDT circular that mandates not filing or pressing appeals where the tax effect is below a certain threshold. This decision was also supported by a Supreme Court ruling.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal decided to dismiss all appeals as withdrawn, following a CBDT circular that mandates not filing or pressing appeals where the tax effect is below a certain threshold. This decision was also supported by a Supreme Court ruling.

The Tribunal upheld the deletion of disallowance under Section 14A as the assessee earned no dividend income. The assessee's appeals regarding the classification of rental income were restored to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.

The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were non-maintainable in light of the CBDT circulars and the Supreme Court's decision in Keshav Power Ltd. The circulars liberalized the policy for not filing appeals where the tax effect is below specified thresholds.