Loading ITAT cases…
35 orders · Page 1 of 1
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of disallowance for training expenses, dismissing the Revenue's appeal on this ground. For prior period expenses, the ITAT followed its previous order and restored the issue to the AO. The disallowance under Section 14A was also restored to the AO for re-examination. The cross-objections filed by the assessee were dismissed as not pressed.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, citing the Supreme Court's liberal approach to delay condonation. The Tribunal also directed the deletion of an addition based on a prior ITAT ruling in the assessee's own case regarding TDS provisions.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order on several grounds, including allowing deduction for bad debts and reducing disallowance for prior period expenses. The Tribunal also dismissed the Revenue's appeal regarding the violation of Rule 46A.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that accrued expenses were ascertained liabilities and that interest on specific funds was not part of regular business income. The Tribunal also confirmed the higher depreciation rate on railways and rolling stock, treating them as 'plant and machinery'.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, citing the Supreme Court's liberal approach to delay condonation. The Tribunal also directed the deletion of an addition based on a prior ITAT ruling in the assessee's own case regarding TDS provisions.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, citing the Supreme Court's liberal approach to delay condonation. The Tribunal also directed the deletion of an addition based on a prior ITAT ruling in the assessee's own case regarding TDS provisions.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, citing the Supreme Court's liberal approach to delay condonation. The Tribunal also directed the deletion of an addition based on a prior ITAT ruling in the assessee's own case regarding TDS provisions.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, citing the Supreme Court's liberal approach to delay condonation. The Tribunal also directed the deletion of an addition based on a prior ITAT ruling in the assessee's own case regarding TDS provisions.
The Tribunal held that the reopening was based on the same material available during the original assessment and lacked fresh tangible information, thus constituting a 'change of opinion'. Consequently, the reassessment order was set aside.
The Tribunal held that the reopening was based on the same material available during the original assessment and lacked fresh tangible information, thus constituting a 'change of opinion'. Consequently, the reassessment order was set aside.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as the assessee repeatedly sought adjournments without providing any explanation or evidence. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)'s order, which was also passed due to the assessee's non-compliance.
The Tribunal held that the period of six months for investment under Section 54EC is to be calculated from the end of the month in which the transfer of the capital asset took place. Therefore, the assessee's investment was within the prescribed time limit.
The CIT(A) correctly followed the ITAT's precedent which held that the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 80IA(4) for developing roads, bridges, and railway systems. The revenue's appeal was dismissed.
The Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to proportionate deduction for units that met the criteria, and that claiming a deduction that is later disallowed does not automatically amount to concealment of income. Therefore, the penalty was deleted.
The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the addition in the assessee's hands after providing an opportunity of hearing, modifying the CIT(A)'s order. For the penalty under Section 271B, the Tribunal deleted the penalty by relying on a CBDT circular stating that penalty is not leviable if the audit report is obtained within the due date, even if not filed immediately.
The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the addition in the assessee's hands after providing an opportunity of hearing, modifying the CIT(A)'s order. For the penalty under Section 271B, the Tribunal deleted the penalty by relying on a CBDT circular stating that penalty is not leviable if the audit report is obtained within the due date, even if not filed immediately.
The Tribunal confirmed the order of the CIT(A), dismissing the assessee's grounds regarding the claim of indexed cost of acquisition and incidental expenses. The Tribunal also noted that no arguments were advanced for the consequential levy of interest.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to allow certain prior period expenses, finding that the crystallization of these expenses in the relevant financial year justified their deductibility. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed on these grounds.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), finding reasonable cause due to the assessee being a government functionary requiring approvals. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed it to adjudicate the appeal on merits.
The Tribunal held that failure to supply the reasons for reopening the assessment, when requested, makes the reassessment order bad in law. This is a jurisdictional issue that must be strictly complied with.
The Tribunal found that the lower authorities did not properly verify the fund flow statement and the claimed sources of deposits submitted by the assessee. Therefore, the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-appearance without confirming proper notice issuance. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
The Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) in deleting the additions, following a coordinate bench's decision in the assessee's own case for an earlier assessment year. The interest and rental income were treated as business income eligible for deduction under Section 80P.
The Tribunal found that the notice might not have been served due to the change of address. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the additions, relying on a previous decision in the assessee's own case for an earlier assessment year. The interest and rental income were treated as business income eligible for deduction under Section 80P.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the additions, relying on a previous decision in the assessee's own case for an earlier assessment year. The interest and rental income were treated as business income eligible for deduction under Section 80P.
The Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) in deleting the additions, following a coordinate bench's decision in the assessee's own case for an earlier assessment year. The interest and rental income were treated as business income eligible for deduction under Section 80P.
The Tribunal held that once books of accounts are rejected, no further addition can be made on account of sundry creditors or other liabilities, relying on High Court decisions. For the assessee's appeal, it was held that disallowance of partners' remuneration is not permissible if paid as per the partnership deed and within statutory limits, especially when taxed in the partners' hands.
The Tribunal held that the transactions were genuine and the assessee had reasonable cause for accepting cash loans, considering the circumstances and relying on judicial precedents. Therefore, the penalty was deleted.
The Tribunal held that once books of accounts are rejected, no further addition can be made on account of sundry creditors or other liabilities, relying on High Court decisions. For the assessee's appeal, it was held that disallowance of partners' remuneration is not permissible if paid as per the partnership deed and within statutory limits, especially when taxed in the partners' hands.