Category: ITAT
No deduction/allowance is allowable against unexplained cash credit u/s 68 which is considered as income of the assessee ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3599 (2022) (05) ITAT Important case law relied referred:Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. CIT 247 ITR 290 In a recent judgment, the ITAT has held that …
No revision u/s 263 simply because AO in order did not make an elaborate discussion – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3597 (2022) (05) ITAT Important case law relied referred:Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. 243 ITR 83Gabriel India Ltd 203 ITR 10CIT vs. Anil Kumar reported in 335 ITR …
CIT is required to make enquiries himself to allege assessment order as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue u/s 263 ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3596 (2022) (05) ITAT Important case law relied referred:CIT Vs Jaiswal Motor Finance 141 ITR 706 (All)CIT Vs Metachem Industries 245 ITR …
ITAT admits additional evidences as assessee died before assessment proceedings and it could not be collected in time by legal heirs ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3595 (2022) (05) ITAT In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) in restricting the addition made …
Appeal disposed of in a hurried manner without affording reasonable opportunity or being heard set aside by ITAT ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3593 (2022) (05) ITAT In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the Assessing …
Invoking Revisionary powers u/s 263 merely on the basis of suspicion not justified. Where AO made necessary inquiry and satisfied itself about explanation offered, revising such order is unjustified – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3591 (2022) (05) ITAT Important case law relied referred:CIT vs. Anil Kumar Sharma …
Disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) for delayed EPF deposit. Amendment by Finance Act is prospective – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation ABCAUS 3590 (2022) (05) ITAT Important case law relied referred:Azamgarh Steel & Power vs. CPCCIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. 188 Taxman 265 (Delhi)Vedvan Consultants Pvt. Ltd. vs DCITPCIT vs Pro …
Amendment by Finance Act 2021 for disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) read with u/s 43B retrospective or prospective is debatable & controversial – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3588 (2022) (03) ITAT Important case law relied referred:CIT vs. Hindustan Electro Graphites Ltd. 243 ITR 0048 (SC)Modern Fibotex India Ltd. & …
Only AO holding charge over an assessee for assessment purposes could issue reassessment notice u/s 148 – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation ABCAUS 3587 (2022) (03) ITAT Important case law relied referred:Lt. Col. Paramjeet Singh vs. CIT (1996) 220 ITR 446Attar Singh & Ors. In the instant case, …
Deduction of annual mixed used charge not allowable from house property income u/s 23(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3586 (2022) (03) ITAT In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) in upholding the disallowance …
