This weekly round-up analytically summarizes the key stories related to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) reported at Taxscan.in during the previous week from November 8 to November 14, 2021.
The Chennai bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the rental income received through sub-leasing of the property shall be treated as the business income of the assessee as the same was the business of the assessee-Company.
In a major relief to the Karur Vysya Bank, the Chennai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) allowed a deduction in respect of Education Cess. “We are of the considered view that this issue needs to go back to the file of the AO to consider the issue in light of the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sesa Goa Ltd., vs. JCIT, supra. Hence, we set aside the issue to the file of the AO and direct him to reconsider the issue in accordance with law and also by considering the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Bombay High Court,” the coram of Judicial Member, V. Durga Rao, and Accountant Member G. Manjunatha ruled.
The Lucknow Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) ruled that the show cause notice not specifying the Charge under which penalty is proposed to be levied, is void ab initio.
In a major relief to Honda Motorcycle and Scooter India Pvt. Ltd, the Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) directed the AO to delete Addition on account of capitalization of royalty expenses by holding it to be revenue in nature.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bangalore bench has held that the expenses towards reclamation and rehabilitation of mine area shall be allowable as a deduction under 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The Bangalore bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the guarantee commission, is not in the nature of a “levy”, cannot be disallowed under section 40(a)(iib) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Allahabad Bench upheld the additions on account of unexplained investment in FDR. The coram of Judicial Member, Vijay Pal Rao, and Accountant Member, Ramit Kochar ruled that rejected the claim of the assessee that it had Rs. 5,52,650/- as opening cash in hand as of 01.04.2008, as there is no evidence on record to justify the same. This leaves us with a balance of Rs. 5,94,800/- and this cash deposit also remained unexplained as no justification is offered by the assessee and/or the justification offered stood rejected by us.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
