Loading ITAT cases…
1,392 orders · Page 7 of 28
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The Senior DR had no objection to the withdrawal.
The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeals. This dismissal is 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. 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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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 noted the assessee's decision to settle the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and treated the appeal as dismissed. However, it allowed the assessee to approach the Tribunal for reinstitution if the dispute is not resolved under the Act.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act. Consequently, the appeal was consigned to records and treated as dismissed, subject to the condition that it could be reinstituted if the dispute was not resolved under the Act.
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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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 accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the tribunal.
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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.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 for withdrawal of the appeals. The Senior DR had no objection to this request.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and requested withdrawal of the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was consigned to records and treated as dismissed.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the AO erred by not passing a separate assessment order for the non-resident's income in the assessee's representative capacity. The addition of the non-resident's capital gains to the assessee's individual income was deemed invalid.
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 by the Tribunal.
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 dismissed the assessee's appeal as withdrawn, subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the VSV 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. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed as infructuous, and the Assessee's appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeal. This 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 tribunal noted the assessee's intention to settle under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act and consequently consigned the appeal to records. The dismissal is subject to the condition that if the dispute is not resolved under the Act, the assessee can seek reinstitution of the appeal.
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. Since there was no objection from the Department, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal dismissed the ground related to depreciation on finance leased assets, holding it to be part of the assessee's business. The issue of disallowance under Section 14A was remanded to the AO for proper quantification and adjudication.
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. Since there was no objection from the Department, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
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 for withdrawal of the appeals. The Senior DR had no objection to the withdrawal.
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. Since there was no objection from the Department, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal disposed of the Revenue's appeals in favor of the assessee, noting that the assessee had opted for settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The Revenue was granted liberty to seek revival if the settlement was not finalized.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had opted for settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act. Therefore, the appeal was considered infructuous.
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 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 appeals. The appeals were accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for dismissal of the appeals. The Senior DR had no objection to this course of action.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for dismissal of the appeals. The Senior DR had no objection to this course of action.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for dismissal of the appeals. The Senior DR had no objection to this course of action.
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. Since there was no objection from the Department, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the lower authorities had not considered the CBDT Circular No. 8 of 2006 in its true perspective regarding the definition of 'producer' for the purpose of Rule 6DD. Therefore, the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request for withdrawal of the appeals. Since there was no objection from the Department, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal found that the AO's jurisdiction was questionable given the assessee's past assessments in another jurisdiction. The CIT(A) also erred in not deciding the merits of the additions despite submissions.
The Tribunal noted that the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 revised the monetary limit for filing appeals to Rs. 50 Lacs and that this circular was applicable to pending appeals. Therefore, the appeal was not maintainable.
The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal as withdrawn. However, it granted the assessee liberty to approach the Tribunal for reinstitution of the appeal if the dispute is not resolved under the VSV scheme.