Loading ITAT cases…
222 orders · Page 1 of 5
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn in light of the Vivad Se Vishwas Act.
The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. This was based on the assessee's compliance with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and the issuance of a certificate by the Designated Authority.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal. The appeal was consequently dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was consequently dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal. The appeal was consequently dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal granted the assessee's request for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn after the assessee complied with the requirements of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the assessee had opted for the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and Form 3 was issued by the Department.
The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. This was based on the assessee's compliance with the requirements of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with the condition that it would be restored if the assessee's application under the 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme' was not approved by the authorities.
The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. This was permitted due to the assessee's compliance with the requirements of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal granted 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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn due to the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.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 granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal after noting compliance with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's application to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee availing the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme.
The Tribunal granted 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 The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn due to the settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.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 accepted the assessee's application to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee availing the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal, acknowledging his compliance with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was granted liberty to seek restoration if issues arose with the certificate issuance.
The Tribunal granted the assessee's request for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn after the assessee complied with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was consequently dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that a loan, being a liability, cannot be treated as income. Since the source of the loan was identified as a bank, it could not be considered unexplained money under Section 69A. Therefore, the addition made by the authorities below was erroneous.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the assessee to seek restoration if issues arose with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with a condition. The appeal would be restored if the assessee's application under the 'Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme' was not approved by the authorities.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal due to their compliance with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The assessee was granted liberty to seek restoration if issues arose with the certificate or eligibility.
The Tribunal granted the assessee's application for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn after the assessee complied with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the assessee to seek restoration if issues arose with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to seek restoration if issues arose with the Vivad Se Vishwas certificate.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal, acknowledging her compliance with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The appeal was dismissed with liberty to restore it if issues arose with the certificate issuance.
The Tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. The settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme was accepted as valid grounds for withdrawal.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee opting for the Vivad Se Vishwas scheme.
The tribunal is issuing a correction regarding the distribution of its order in ITA No. 1829/Kol/2018 for AY 2012-13. The corrigendum rectifies an error in forwarding copies of the order to various parties.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal granted the assessee's request for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn due to the assessee's successful settlement under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal, acknowledging her compliance with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the Pr. CIT erred in exercising powers under Section 263 as the assessment order had merged with the CIT(A)'s order, and the Pr. CIT could not direct the AO to follow directions not part of the appellate order. Furthermore, a limited scrutiny assessment cannot be deemed erroneous solely for not converting to a complete scrutiny.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's application to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn by the tribunal.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal of the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The tribunal granted the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal. This was based on the assessee's compliance with the requirements of the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The tribunal accepted the assessee's application to withdraw the appeals. The appeals were dismissed as withdrawn by the tribunal.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the revisionary powers exercised by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 were bad in law. This was based on the finding that the Assessing Officer had conducted adequate enquiries and had taken a possible view, and that the revision was an attempt to review the predecessor's order.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application for withdrawal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's application and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The assessee had obtained a certificate under the Vivad Se Vishwas Act.
The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to seek restoration if issues arise with the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The Tribunal held that the AO cannot make additions on issues that were not the basis for reopening the assessment, especially when no addition was made on the original reason for reopening. Therefore, the assessment order was deemed bad in law.
The assessee applied for withdrawal of the appeal as they decided to settle the dispute under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020. The Tribunal granted the permission for withdrawal.
The Tribunal partly allowed the revenue's appeal on Section 14A by restricting the disallowance to the extent of dividend income. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal on derivative loss, confirming the CIT(A)'s view that it was not speculation loss. The appeal on PF contribution was also dismissed, upholding the CIT(A)'s deletion.