Judgement

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Delhi condoned a delay of 1486 days in filing an appeal before the CIT(A), observing that the assessee was not properly served with assessment proceedings and the assessment order.

ITAT Condones 1486 Days Delay in Filing Appeal Holding Assessee Was Denied Opportunity Due to Non-Service of Assessment Order

Section 250(6) mandates reasoned findings even in ex parte appellate proceedings.

ITAT Remands Rs 6 Crore Section 68 Addition After Finding CIT(A)’s Ex-Parte Order Non-Speaking 

Recorded sales supported by books cannot be treated as unexplained money.

ITAT Deletes Rs 33 Lakh Addition, Holds Genuine Sales Cannot Be Treated as Unexplained Money Merely on CBIC Information

Tribunal allows ESOP deduction but denies loss carry forward under Section 72A.

ITAT Denies Section 72A Benefit Where Resulting Company Failed to Issue Shares

The ITAT held the entire rectification proceedings invalid, as the AO had initially accepted the charging of Section 234C interest at Rs 7.82 lakh; hence, it cannot increase the amount later.

ITAT Invalidates Rectification Proceedings As Interest Was Already Charged Under Section 234C; AO Cannot Revise It Later

ITAT quashed the reassessment against Kedia Carbon Pvt. Ltd., holding that the AO reopened the assessment on incorrect facts, borrowed satisfaction, and without independent application of mind.

Explore Our Blogs

Stay updated with the latest insights, tips, and industry trends from our experts

ITAT Condones 1486 Days Delay in Filing Appeal Holding Assessee Was Denied Opportunity Due to Non-Service of Assessment Order

ITAT Remands Rs 6 Crore Section 68 Addition After Finding CIT(A)’s Ex-Parte Order Non-Speaking

ITAT Deletes Rs 33 Lakh Addition, Holds Genuine Sales Cannot Be Treated as Unexplained Money Merely on CBIC Information

ITAT Denies Section 72A Benefit Where Resulting Company Failed to Issue Shares

ITAT Invalidates Rectification Proceedings As Interest Was Already Charged Under Section 234C; AO Cannot Revise It Later

ITAT Rules Reassessment Invalid Where AO Relied on Erroneous Facts