Loading ITAT cases…
938 orders · Page 6 of 19
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The assessee opted to settle the tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as the dispute was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
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 accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as per the assessee's decision to settle under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn based on the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.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 a certificate under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 had been filed.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of notional interest on advances to sister concerns and the addition for unexplained investment, finding the sources explained. The Tribunal also upheld the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the disallowance of salary expenses.
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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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 tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal held that the AMP expenses incurred by the assessee were not an international transaction as per the established legal position, and the adjustment made by the TPO/DRP was unsustainable. The Tribunal also noted that the matter was pending before the Supreme Court.
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 The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn based on the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.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 accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s decision to restrict the disallowance of interest on customer deposits based on a consistent past ratio was justified. Similarly, the disallowance under Section 14A was upheld as per the ratio decided by the Delhi High Court in the assessee's own case.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as per the assessee's request.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed in light of the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal held that the deduction under Section 80IB(10)(f) can only be proportionately reduced for allotments to related parties, not entirely disallowed. It also directed recomputation of interest under Sections 234B and 234C, finding Section 234C not applicable for shortfalls due to capital gains.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as per the assessee's request.
The assessee requested withdrawal of the appeal as they opted to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The tribunal accepted this request.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed in light of the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal noted 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.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as the dispute was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal recalled its earlier ex-parte order as a mistake had occurred regarding the tax effect. Subsequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal as the tax effect was below the revised monetary limit of Rs. 50 lacs set by a new CBDT circular.
The assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as they opted to settle the tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The tribunal accepted this request.
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 depreciation on capital assets is allowable as application of income, following the Delhi High Court's decision. It also held that disputed rental income, where collection is uncertain, should not be taxed until resolved.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed in light of the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act.
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer's reopening of the assessment was invalid because it was based on a mere perusal of existing records and constituted a 'change of opinion' without any tangible new material. The CIT(A)'s decision to quash the reassessment proceedings was upheld.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. The appeals were 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 for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the loss on account of expired products is a normal business expenditure and a risk attached to the marketing company. It found no justification for restricting the allowance to 70% and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance entirely.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal. The appeals were dismissed as a consequence of the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal held that the AMP expenses incurred by the assessee were not an international transaction as per the established legal position, and the adjustment made by the TPO/DRP was unsustainable. The Tribunal also noted that the matter was pending before the Supreme Court.
The assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as they had opted to settle the tax arrears under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The tribunal accepted this request.
The assessee requested withdrawal of the appeal as they had opted to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The Tribunal accepted the request.
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 due to the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 143(2) was issued by a non-jurisdictional Income Tax Officer, rendering the entire assessment proceedings void ab initio. Therefore, the assessment order was quashed.
The Tribunal upheld the deletion of the addition, agreeing with the CIT(A) that the TNMM method was the most appropriate for benchmarking these transactions. The Tribunal noted that the CUP method was not applicable as the TPO failed to provide comparable uncontrolled transactions.
The assessee requested to withdraw the appeal as they opted to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The tribunal accepted this request.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. This was based on the assessee opting to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had settled the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and a certificate was filed. The Revenue had no objection to the withdrawal of the appeal.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn based on the assessee's settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn based on the assessee's settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.