Loading ITAT cases…
3,878 tribunal orders from the Delhi bench in 2020.
Showing 40 of 3,878 orders. Use the months below for the rest.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn in light of the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. This was based on the assessee opting to settle the tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and the declaration was accepted by the Revenue. Consequently, the appeal was treated as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's statement and dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to the assessee to move for recalling the order if Form No. 3 was not issued by the competent authority.
The Tribunal held that the assessee should be given credit for the opening cash balance accepted in the wealth tax assessment for the previous year, thereby reducing the addition. The enhancement made by the CIT(Appeals) was quashed for violating the principles of natural justice by not issuing a show-cause notice and for being unsustainable when the books of accounts were rejected.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. This was based on the assessee opting to settle the tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
The Tribunal decided to consign the appeal to records and treat it as dismissed. This dismissal is subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the assessee can seek reinstitution of the appeal.
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer failed to dispose of the assessee's objections to the reopening notice by passing a speaking order, which vitiated the reassessment proceedings. The Tribunal also noted that the approval for issuing the notice under Section 148 was obtained after the notice was issued.
The Tribunal set aside the ex parte order of the CIT(A) and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee is to be given a sufficient opportunity of hearing.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's statement and dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. Liberty was granted to the assessee to move for recalling the order if Form No. 3 was not issued by the competent authority.
The Tribunal considered the assessee's request for withdrawal due to opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The appeal was consigned to records and treated as dismissed, with a caveat for reinstitution if the dispute is not resolved.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the assessee may have claimed expenses wrongly but not falsely. The penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) was not sustainable in law, following the judgment in Reliance Petro Products.
The ITAT accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal noted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal as they opted to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
The Tribunal decided to consign the appeal to records and treat it as dismissed. This dismissal is conditional, allowing the assessee to seek reinstitution if the Vivad Se Vishwas settlement is not resolved.
The Tribunal considered the assessee's request for withdrawal due to opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The appeal was consigned to records and treated as dismissed, with a caveat for reinstitution if the settlement fails.
The tribunal decided to consign the appeal to records and treat it as dismissed, subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the assessee can seek reinstitution of the appeal.
The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's decision to settle under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The appeal was consigned to records and treated as dismissed, with a provision for reinstitution if the settlement fails.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, acknowledging the assessee's participation in the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to move for recalling the order if Form No. 3 was not issued.
The Tribunal noted the assessee's request for withdrawal due to opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. It allowed the withdrawal with a caveat that appeals could be reinstituted if the settlement was not resolved.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn due to the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn in light of the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the monetary limit specified in CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. This circular, which enhanced the monetary limit for filing appeals, was applicable to pending appeals.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal decided to consign the appeal to records and treat it as dismissed. This is subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the assessee can seek reinstitution of the appeal.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The assessee had opted to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
The Tribunal noted the assessee's decision to settle under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and accordingly consigned the appeal to records. The dismissal is conditional upon the successful resolution of the dispute under the scheme.
The Tribunal held that the appeal of the Revenue deserved to be dismissed in limine due to low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 and its subsequent clarification. The circular was binding on tax authorities and applied retrospectively to pending appeals.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal consigned the appeals to records and treated them as dismissed, subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, the assessee can seek reinstitution of the appeal.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. This was based on the assessee opting to settle the tax dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
The Tribunal considered the assessee's request and ordered the appeal to be consigned to records and treated as dismissed. This dismissal is subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the assessee can seek reinstitution of the appeal.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. This was based on the assessee opting to settle the tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.