Loading ITAT cases…
938 orders · Page 12 of 19
The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable as per CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019 due to the low tax effect. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw its appeal. For the Revenue's appeal, it was noted that withdrawal would depend on the assessee's payment post-scheme processing.
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 Income Tax Appellate 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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the assessee to approach the Tribunal for re-institution if the settlement under the scheme is not resolved.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as the assessee opted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was granted liberty to revive the appeal if the dispute settlement fails.
The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal as withdrawn, subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the Vivad se Vishwash Act, the assessee can seek reinstitution of the appeal.
The tribunal noted that the Revenue's standing instructions require payment after processing under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act for withdrawal. They clarified that if the dispute isn't resolved or issues arise, the Revenue can seek reinstitution of the appeal.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had filed the necessary declaration under the Vivad se Vishwas Act and received Form-III. Consequently, the appeal was consigned to records.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee has filed a declaration under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. Consequently, the appeal was consigned to records and treated as dismissed.
The Tribunal allowed the withdrawal of the appeal, subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the scheme, the assessee can seek reinstitution of the appeal.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had obtained Form No. 3 under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. As per Section 4(2) of the Act, appeals pending before the Tribunal are deemed to be withdrawn upon issuance of the certificate.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had obtained Form No. 3 under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. As per Section 4(2) of the Act, appeals pending before the Tribunal are deemed to be withdrawn upon issuance of the certificate.
The Tribunal granted permission to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was consequently dismissed as withdrawn by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal as the assessee intended to settle the dispute under the Vivaad Se Vishwas Scheme. Liberty was granted to revive the appeal if the settlement failed for technical reasons.
The Tribunal deleted the addition on unsecured loans, finding that the assessee had discharged the onus by providing repayment evidence. It also deleted the addition on short-term capital gains, deeming it a double addition as similar issues were addressed in a prior assessment year.
The Tribunal held that the penalty proceedings were not sustainable because the notice issued by the Assessing Officer was vague and ambiguous, failing to specify whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This was supported by High Court and Supreme Court decisions.
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. Liberty was granted to revive the appeal if the dispute could not be settled under the Vivaad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. This was based on the settlement achieved under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance on investment written off and accrued interest, following previous decisions in the assessee's own case. The Tribunal also upheld the deletion of 50% of the disallowance on guest house expenses, again following precedent.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request to withdraw its appeal. For the Revenue's appeal, it was noted that withdrawal would depend on the assessee's payment post-scheme processing.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal deleted the disallowance on advertisement and publicity expenses as TDS provisions were not attracted. It also deleted the addition for sundry creditors, finding no cessation of liability. The addition under Section 41(1) was deleted as the amounts were found to be security deposits and had been subsequently paid.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and a certificate to this effect was filed.
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 dismissed the assessee's appeal as withdrawn, subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the Vivad se Vishwash Act, 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 upheld the deletion of disallowances under Section 14A and for CSR expenses, finding no illegality. The disallowance for sustainable development expenses was set aside to the AO for reconsideration based on past precedents.
The assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as they opted to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The Tribunal accepted the request for withdrawal.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn based on the assessee's settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal upheld the deletion of disallowances under Section 14A and for CSR expenses, finding no illegality. The issue of sustainable development expenses was set aside to the AO for reconsideration based on consistency with earlier years.
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 this request.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s direction to calculate the Gross Annual Value (GAV) from December 14, 2012, to March 31, 2013. This was based on the fact that an occupation certificate was obtained for part of the building on December 14, 2012, making the AO's ad-hoc calculation unsustainable.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal noted the assessee's request for withdrawal due to settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal noted the assessee's decision to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and requested withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was consequently consigned to records and treated as dismissed.
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.
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 allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn based on the assessee's participation in the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme.
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 to withdraw 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.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal noted the assessee's decision to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and accepted the request for withdrawal. The appeal was consigned to records and treated as dismissed.
The Tribunal granted permission to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the assessee.