Loading ITAT cases…
670 orders · Page 13 of 14
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had filed a declaration under the 'Vivad se Vishwash Scheme' for settlement of tax disputes. Both parties agreed to treat the appeal as withdrawn and dismissed.
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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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. The withdrawal was based on the assessee opting to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. The Senior DR had no objection to this request.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The Senior DR had no objection to the withdrawal.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn based on the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn based on the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal held that the assessee had provided sufficient evidence to establish the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transaction. The AO's addition was therefore deleted.
The Tribunal held that the reopening of the assessment was illegal and bad in law because the AO recorded incorrect and non-existing reasons without applying his mind to the information received. The Tribunal quashed the reopening and deleted all additions.
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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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. The withdrawal was based on the assessee opting to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as she opted to settle the tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The Tribunal accepted the request.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn based on the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal held that the amended Section 140A(3) of the Act, effective from 01.04.1989, does not envisage any penalty for non-payment of self-assessment tax, but rather mandatory interest. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was not justified in levying the penalty.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the disallowance of travel, conveyance, and salary expenses for seconded employees was not warranted, following the AO's acceptance of similar claims in a prior assessment year based on the principle of consistency. The appeal was allowed partly.
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 based on the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The tribunal noted that the Senior DR had no objection to the withdrawal.
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 held that the AO's additions were based on surmises and conjectures, lacking independent verification. The assessee had provided documentary evidence, and the AO failed to confront the assessee with any material to disprove the genuineness of the transactions.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in not admitting the additional evidence and in upholding the additions without proper examination. The Tribunal remitted some issues back to the AO for fresh adjudication and deleted one addition based on the death of a key witness.
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 held that upon issuance of a certificate under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, any pending appeal is deemed to have been withdrawn. Therefore, the Revenue's appeal became infructuous.
The ITAT accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal found sufficient cause for the assessee's non-appearance and recalled the ex-parte order. Additionally, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed as the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit.
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 Senior DR had no objection to the withdrawal.
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. The withdrawal was based on the assessee opting to settle the tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s finding regarding non-payment of taxes within the due date was based on an erroneous interpretation of Form 26AS. The Tribunal found that taxes were paid well before the due date and deleted the penalty.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The Senior DR had no objection to the withdrawal.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeals. The withdrawal was based on the assessee opting to settle the tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
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 in view of 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 for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the buyback of FCCBs at a discount resulted in a capital receipt, not taxable income. It also ruled that expenses related to exempt income cannot be added while computing book profit under Section 115JB, following a Special Bench decision.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal noted the assessee's submission regarding the settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the buyback of FCCBs at a discount resulted in a capital receipt, not taxable income. It also ruled that expenses related to exempt income cannot be added while computing book profit under Section 115JB, following a Special Bench decision.