Loading ITAT cases…
381 orders · Page 6 of 8
The Tribunal held that material found during the first search cannot be used to make additions in assessment proceedings consequent to a second search. Blank signed transfer forms and blank cheque books do not constitute incriminating material.
The Tribunal held that material found during the first search cannot be used to make additions in assessment proceedings consequent to a second search. Blank signed transfer forms and blank cheque books do not constitute incriminating material.
The Tribunal held that material found during the first search cannot be used to make additions in assessment proceedings consequent to a second search. Blank signed transfer forms and blank cheque books do not constitute incriminating material.
The Tribunal held that material found during the first search cannot be used to make additions in assessment proceedings consequent to a second search. Blank signed transfer forms and blank cheque books do not constitute incriminating material.
The Tribunal held that the DIT(E) was not justified in cancelling the registration. It noted that the cancellation was made retrospectively from inception, prior to the relevant legal provisions allowing such cancellation, and that donations between charitable trusts are not inherently prohibited.
The Tribunal held that material found during the first search cannot be used to make additions in assessment proceedings consequent to a second search. Blank cheque books and signed transfer forms do not constitute incriminating material for completed assessment years.
The Tribunal held that material found during the first search cannot be used to make additions in assessment proceedings consequent to a second search. Blank signed transfer forms and blank cheque books do not constitute incriminating material.
The Tribunal held that the additions made by the AO were not based on incriminating material. The documents found did not pertain to the impugned assessment years or were already part of the assessee's regular books of account, thus not indicating undisclosed income.
The Tribunal held that material found during the first search cannot be used to make additions in assessment proceedings consequent to a second search. Blank signed transfer forms and blank cheque books do not constitute incriminating material.
The Tribunal held that material found during the first search cannot be used to make additions in assessment proceedings consequent to a second search. Blank signed transfer forms and blank cheque books do not constitute incriminating material.
The Tribunal held that material found during the first search cannot be used to make additions in assessment proceedings consequent to a second search. Blank signed transfer forms and blank cheque books do not constitute incriminating material.
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had taken a plausible view that the waiver of loan was a capital receipt after examining all relevant documents. Therefore, the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue.
The Tribunal held that it has the power to consider claims not raised in a revised return, unlike the lower authorities. It allowed the excise subsidy to be treated as a capital receipt and also allowed the deduction of education cess as an expenditure.
The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable due to low tax effect, which was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT circulars. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed on this technical ground.
The Tribunal held that the PCIT's order under Section 263 was invalid because it went beyond the scope of the limited scrutiny initially selected for the assessment. The AO had already examined the issues related to property purchase and capital gains.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had settled the dispute under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and had been issued Form No.3. Therefore, the assessee sought to withdraw the appeal.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the CIT(A) to grant the assessee one more opportunity to explain the delay and the merits of the case. The assessee was directed to appear without adjournment.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(A) to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to present their case. The assessee is directed to appear without seeking adjournments.
The assessee sought permission to withdraw the appeal as the matter was settled under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The tribunal granted permission to withdraw.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(A) to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to present its case. The assessee is directed to appear without seeking any adjournment.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits as per Section 250(6) of the IT Act, not just dismissed it for non-prosecution. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.
The Tribunal held that for service providers, project-wise accounting and valuation of closing work-in-progress are not mandatory. The Assessing Officer erred in disallowing expenses on an ad-hoc basis without finding specific defects in the accounts.
The tribunal considered the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal and the lack of objection from the Departmental Representative. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the assessment proceedings under Section 153A were invalid without incriminating material found during the search. Furthermore, a statement obtained under coercion, which was later retracted and did not pertain to the year under consideration, cannot form the basis for additions.
The Tribunal allowed 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 assessment proceedings under Section 153A were invalid without incriminating material found during the search. Furthermore, a statement obtained under coercion, which was later retracted and did not pertain to the year under consideration, cannot form the basis for additions.
The Tribunal restored the issue back to the CIT(A) to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case. The assessee is directed to appear and explain without seeking adjournment.
The tribunal noted the assessee's settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act and the Revenue's concession. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the foreign exchange fluctuation loss on non-depreciable assets is not allowable as a deduction. However, it allowed depreciation on assets acquired using funds raised through FCCBs, considering it as a capital receipt.
The Tribunal noted that both parties agreed on the applicability of the 25% RPT filter. Since the financials of Skil Infrastructure Ltd. were not available earlier, the Tribunal remanded the issue to the Assessing Officer/TPO to verify if this entity passes the RPT filter.
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that no disallowance under Section 14A can be made if no exempt income is earned. It also confirmed that the written-off interest satisfied the conditions for bad debt write-off under Section 36(1)(vii) read with Section 36(2).
The Tribunal restored the issue back to the CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. The assessee was directed to appear and explain its case without seeking adjournments.
The tribunal noted the assessee's settlement under the Vivad se Vishwas Act. The Revenue's counsel conceded to dismiss the appeals as withdrawn.
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal as the dispute was settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the CIT(A) to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate her case. The assessee was directed to appear and present her case without seeking adjournments.
The Tribunal held that the assessment proceedings under Section 153A were invalid without incriminating material found during the search. Furthermore, a statement obtained under coercion, which was later retracted and did not pertain to the year under consideration, cannot form the basis for additions.
The Tribunal held that the foreign exchange fluctuation loss on non-depreciable assets is not allowable as a deduction. However, it allowed depreciation on assets acquired using funds raised through FCCBs, considering it as a capital receipt.
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the foreign exchange fluctuation loss on non-depreciable assets is not allowable as a deduction. However, it allowed depreciation on assets acquired using funds raised through FCCBs, considering it as a capital receipt.
The Tribunal held that the assessment proceedings under Section 153A were invalid without incriminating material found during the search. Furthermore, a statement obtained under coercion, which was later retracted and did not pertain to the year under consideration, cannot form the basis for additions.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had settled the dispute under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the disputed taxes. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was treated as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the assessment proceedings under Section 153A were invalid without incriminating material found during the search. Furthermore, a statement obtained under coercion, which was later retracted and did not pertain to the year under consideration, cannot form the basis for additions.
The Tribunal held that the coded entries were not sufficient evidence to prove that the assessee received commission. The Tribunal also noted that similar allegations against the supplier were dismissed in other proceedings and that the Revenue's stance was inconsistent.
The Tribunal held that the assessment proceedings under Section 153A were invalid without incriminating material found during the search. Furthermore, a statement obtained under coercion, which was later retracted and did not pertain to the year under consideration, cannot form the basis for additions.
The Tribunal held that the assessment proceedings under Section 153A were invalid without incriminating material found during the search. Furthermore, a statement obtained under coercion, which was later retracted and did not pertain to the year under consideration, cannot form the basis for additions.
The Tribunal held that the assessment proceedings under Section 153A were invalid without incriminating material found during the search. Furthermore, a statement obtained under coercion, which was later retracted and did not pertain to the year under consideration, cannot form the basis for additions.
The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(A) to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. The assessee was directed to appear and present its case without seeking adjournments.
The Tribunal restored the issue back to the CIT(A) to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to present their case. The assessee is directed to appear and substantiate their claims without seeking adjournments.
The tribunal allowed the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the assessee's salary income earned outside India for services rendered outside India is not taxable in India, even if credited to an Indian bank account, as he stayed outside India for more than 182 days. The addition for stamp duty was also deleted as it was paid by the assessee's wife.