Loading ITAT cases…
387 orders · Page 3 of 8
The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's submission that the delay was not intentional and that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits. The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) with a direction to condone the delay and decide the appeal on merit.
The Tribunal found the 10% GP estimation arbitrary, considering the assessee's past financial trend and audited books. It deemed it proper to estimate the GP at 7% instead of 10%.
The Tribunal held that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) had not adjudicated the appeal on merits as required by law.
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order, remanding the case for fresh adjudication. It emphasized providing the assessee with another opportunity to present their case, citing principles of natural justice.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument that the non-compliance was not deliberate and was due to her limited knowledge and awareness. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty.
The Tribunal held that the assessee cannot be denied the deduction solely because Form 3CL was issued by the DSIR beyond the prescribed time, especially when the assessee had fulfilled its obligations. The CIT(A)'s order allowing the deduction was confirmed.
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order, directing them to condone the delay and decide the appeal afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The assessee was also permitted to raise additional grounds.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) due to sufficient cause. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)/NFAC's order and restored the matter back to the CIT(A)/NFAC. The assessee was directed to present all evidence and submissions without adjournment.
The Tribunal held that while the CIT(A) may not have the power to set aside an assessment order under the amended Section 251(1)(a), the Tribunal itself has such power. Therefore, the matter was restored to the AO for re-adjudication.
The Tribunal held that while the CIT(A) may not have the power to set aside under the amended Section 251(1)(a), the Tribunal itself has such power. Therefore, the matter was restored to the AO for re-adjudication as per the CIT(A)'s directions.
The Tribunal condoned the delay due to reasonable cause and restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing and pass speaking orders.
The Tribunal confirmed the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC and dismissed the appeal. This was due to the assessee's non-appearance on multiple hearing dates and failure to provide supporting documents for his contentions.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that while the CIT(A) may not have had the power to set aside the assessment order under amended Section 251(1)(a), the Tribunal itself has the power to do so. Therefore, the matter was restored to the AO for re-adjudication.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order violated section 250(6) of the Act as it did not adjudicate on merits and was passed without proper examination. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering that the evidence regarding the source of the Rs. 50 lakhs was not presented before the lower authorities, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)/NFAC is obligated to decide appeals on merits and cannot dismiss them for non-prosecution, citing a Bombay High Court judgment. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for adjudication on merits.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. In the interest of justice, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh adjudication on merits, providing the assessee an opportunity to be heard.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals before the ITAT, finding that the delay in filing before the CIT(A) was due to reasonable cause and not deliberate inaction. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal condoned the delay due to reasonable cause and restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing and pass speaking orders.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(Exemption) provided insufficient opportunity to the appellant to furnish details and that the rejection was unjustified. The appellant was deprived of a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), finding sufficient cause for the delay. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
The Tribunal observed that the FTC claim was supported by evidence and the error in Form No. 67 was a procedural mistake. Therefore, the issue was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for verification and allowance of FTC if found correct.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal noted the assessee's request to dismiss the appeals as infructuous and the Department's lack of objection. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed both appeals.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(Exemption) provided insufficient opportunity to the appellant to furnish details and that the rejection was unjustified. The appellant was deprived of a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.