Loading ITAT cases…
278 orders · Page 2 of 6
The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148 for AY 2015-16 was bad in law and void-ab-initio, following various High Court and ITAT decisions. Consequently, the reassessment and penalty orders were quashed.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, 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, 2019, 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, 2019, 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 since the delay payment charges are in the nature of interest and the assessee offered share trading income as business income, the interest expenditure is eligible for deduction.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, 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) is obligated to decide appeals on merits and cannot dismiss them for non-prosecution. The CIT(A)'s order was set aside for de-novo adjudication.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The case was remanded to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication, providing the assessee with one more opportunity to present their case.
The Tribunal held that the CPC erred in disallowing the deduction under Section 143(1) as the amendment allowing such disallowances for Chapter VI-A deductions for returns filed after the due date was effective from AY 2021-22, which was subsequent to the assessment year in question.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, 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, 2019, 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 notice issued under Section 148 for AY 2015-16 was bad in law and void-ab-initio, following various High Court and ITAT decisions. Consequently, the reassessment and penalty orders were quashed.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, 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 deposits were business receipts, though not fully explained. Considering the business nature and subsequent year's accepted profit margin, the Tribunal directed the addition to be restricted to a 12% profit on the cash deposit.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, 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, 2019, 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, 2019, 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, 2019, 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, 2019, 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, 2019, 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 compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme is in the nature of retrenchment compensation and is fully exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act. The impugned orders of the CIT(A) were set aside.
The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148 was barred by limitation as it was issued beyond six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings and the additions made were set aside.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, 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, 2019, 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, 2019, 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 upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the deduction under Section 80-IA should be computed based on profits as per the Act, including all allowable deductions, not just book profits. The Tribunal also affirmed the CIT(A)'s order regarding MAT credit, finding no infirmity.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, 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, 2019, 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, considering the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, and Vidya Shankar Jaiswal vs. ITO, held that a justice-oriented and liberal approach should be adopted when considering condonation of delay. The Tribunal found that refusing to condone delay can lead to meritorious matters being dismissed prematurely. Given the totality of facts, the decision of the coordinate bench in similar cases, and the principles of substantial justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The matter was restored to the CIT(A)'s file with a direction to condone the delay and decide the appeal on its merits after giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard. The grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, 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, 2019, 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, 2019, 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, 2019, 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, 2019, 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, 2019, 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 partly allowed the appeal, deleting some additions based on its previous decisions in the assessee's own case. For Section 14A, the issue was restored to the AO for recalculation.
The Tribunal held that the assessee had already offered a net profit rate of 3.62%, which was considered sufficient, especially in light of a similar case where a 2% rate was applied. Therefore, no further addition over the declared net profit rate was sustained.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.
The ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeals and restored both the Section 12A registration and Section 80G approval issues back to the CIT(Exemption). The CIT(Exemption) was directed to provide one final opportunity to the assessee to submit the required details to his satisfaction.
The tribunal held that the land sold was urban land and a capital asset, making the capital gains taxable. However, it ruled that interest disallowance was not justified as advances were presumed to be from own funds.
The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148 on 02.04.2022 for AY 2015-16 was bad in law and consequently void-ab-initio. This decision was based on various High Court and ITAT judgments, including the concession made by the Revenue regarding notices issued after 01.04.2021 for AY 2015-16.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, 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 order of the CIT(A) and remanded the case for de-novo adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to allow the assessee an opportunity to be heard and to file additional evidence, and also to provide an opportunity to the Assessing Officer.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, 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, considering the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, and Vidya Shankar Jaiswal vs. ITO, held that a justice-oriented and liberal approach should be adopted when considering condonation of delay. The Tribunal found that refusing to condone delay can lead to meritorious matters being dismissed prematurely. Given the totality of facts, the decision of the coordinate bench in similar cases, and the principles of substantial justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The matter was restored to the CIT(A)'s file with a direction to condone the delay and decide the appeal on its merits after giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard. The grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes.
The Tribunal held that the notice issued under section 148 was bad in law and liable to be quashed, as it was issued beyond the prescribed time limit for AY 2015-16, following various High Court and ITAT decisions.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, 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 considered the submissions for withdrawal and accordingly treated the appeals filed by the assessee as dismissed. The appeals were formally dismissed by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal considered the submissions for withdrawal and accordingly treated the appeals filed by the assessee as dismissed. The appeals were formally dismissed by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal held that the amounts received under the BSNL VRS, 2019, are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Income Tax Act.