Search
Advanced Search Search with field filters
/adv
Navigation
Home Go to homepage
/home
Direct Tax Income Tax resources
GST GST Acts, Rules & Case Laws
Company Law Companies Act & SEBI
Due Date Tracker Statutory compliance deadlines
/due
Due Date Calendar Calendar view of compliance deadlines
Daily Digest Today's tax updates and articles
/digest
Landmark Rulings

ITAT Mumbai — Direct Tax

2,432 rulings

  1. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Jan 2022
    50% estimate of profit in the instant case will meet the ends of justice and revenue is being directed to allow it.

    Ketan Sureshchandra Shah Vs ITO- 25( 2)( 1)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28221 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  2. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Jan 2022
    There is no violation of the provisions of Section 13 (1) (C) and Section 13 (2) of the Act and therefore, the exemption u/s 11 of the Act cannot be denied to the trust.

    THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EX) -1 (1) , MUMBAI VERSUS THE LOHAR CHAWL DAWOODI BOHRA MERCHANTS’ ASSOCIATION

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28217 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95158&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  3. ITAT Mumbai · 20 Jan 2022
    It is established fact that DCF Method is based on projected figures, on availability of the actual figures, if the future projections are not met, it cannot be said that the projections were wrong.

    Credtalpha Alternative Investment Advisors Pvt Ltd Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28203 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 56(2)(viib)

  4. ITAT Mumbai · 20 Jan 2022
    Once learned PCIT held that the assessing officer has failed to enquire into the applicability of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii), he should have left the issue at that and no further.

    RUPA SAMIR MEHTA VERSUS PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX RANGE-19, MUMBAI

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28201 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95104&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  5. ITAT Mumbai · 19 Jan 2022
    Section 68 to be inapplicable as it deals with any sum that is found credited in the books of the Assessee and not the shares received as gift.

    Humuza Consultants Vs The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28195 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 56(2)(viia), 68

  6. ITAT Mumbai · 19 Jan 2022
    Assessing Officer is directed to allow set off of MAT credit inclusive of surcharge and education cess and recompute the tax payable by the assessee for the year under consideration.

    PENINSULA FACILITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES LTD. VERSUS ACIT, CPC, BANGALORE

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28192 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95060&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  7. ITAT Mumbai · 19 Jan 2022
    TPO is mandated by law to determine the ALP by following one of the methods prescribed u/s. 92C read with rule 10B. When No such exercises is carried out by the TPO, the determination at Nil of the ALP is held not sustainable.

    PPG COATINGS INDIA PVT. LTD. (NOW MERGED WITH PPG ASIAN PAINTS PVT. LTD.) VERSUS DCIT-9 (2) MUMBAI

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28191 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95062&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  8. ITAT Mumbai · 19 Jan 2022
    Provisions of section 263 gives power to the revisionary authority to revise the order after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and after making or causing to be made such enquiries as he deems necessary.

    HUMUZA CONSULTANTS VERSUS THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-19, MUMBAI

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28190 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95067&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  9. ITAT Mumbai · 18 Jan 2022
    Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of accumulation u/s.11(2) of the Act. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.

    SETH DAMJI LAXMICHAND JAIN VERSUS ITO (EXEMPTION) -1 (1) MUMBAI

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28182 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=95044&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  10. ITAT Mumbai · 15 Jan 2022
    Just because money is received through banking channels and the confirmations are on record, it did not establish the genuineness of the transaction.

    Mishal Construction Pvt. Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28168 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 68

  11. ITAT Mumbai · 15 Jan 2022
    Bad debts incurred by the assessee is certainly an expenditure allowable deduction u/s. 37 of the Act.

    Ravi Advani Vs Income Tax Officer

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28166 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  12. ITAT Mumbai · 14 Jan 2022
    The scope of Section 69 cannot be extended to bringing to tax investments of a non-resident entity in the hands of a resident individual, in the absence of material to support the inference of beneficial ownership.

    Vilas Waman Katre Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28161 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  13. ITAT Mumbai · 11 Jan 2022
    Increase in the sales resulting into the higher profit could not be the reasons to hold the expenditure to be of capital nature.

    Omni Active Health Technologies Ltd Vs Dy. Commi ssione r of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28142 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  14. ITAT Mumbai · 11 Jan 2022
    Even the participation by the Assessee in the assessment proceedings would also not make any difference because the facts remains that the assessment order has been passed by the assessing officer in the name of a nonexistent company.

    Accenture Solutions Private Limited (ASOL) (As a Successor to Accenture Services Private Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28141 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  15. ITAT Mumbai · 11 Jan 2022
    When there is no change in income assessed the order of AO cannot be said to be prejudicial to the interest of revenue.

    KAMAL VYAS VERSUS PCIT-17, MUMBAI

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28134 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · https://taxcorp.in/FileOpenDT.aspx?ID=94933&Category=ITAT&CategoryType=Zip

  16. ITAT Mumbai · 08 Jan 2022
    Sec.250(2) provides Assessee right to be heard when the CIT(A) decides the issue on merits and therefore if any direction was passed by the CIT(A), Assessee should be given an opportunity to meet out such observation.

    Lokhandwala Foundation Vs Income-tax Officer

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28129 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  17. ITAT Mumbai · 08 Jan 2022
    Merely because the parties are related parties and there is no evidence of any collusion, the loss incurred by the Assessee by writing off the amount could not be disallowed.

    SDN & Co Vs The Income-tax Officer

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28125 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 36(1)(vii)

  18. ITAT Mumbai · 16 Jun 2021
    The rent paid by the assessee trust to the trustees was not excessive or unreasonable.

    The Sardar Partapsingh Education society Vs The Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28117 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 13(1)(c), 10(23C)(vi)

  19. ITAT Mumbai · 15 Jun 2021
    For any disallowances to be made, fresh notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) should have been issued w.r.t. specific issues therein.

    IDBI Bank Ltd Vs Asst. CIT (LTU)-2

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28114 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 143(2)

  20. ITAT Mumbai · 14 Jun 2021
    Upon tendering cheque, if it is not dishonoured on presentation, the payment shall be deemed to have been made on the date of handing over cheque to the Government’s Bankers.

    Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-1(3)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 28111 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.


An unhandled error has occurred. Reload ×

Rejoining the server...

Rejoin failed... trying again in seconds.

Failed to rejoin.
Please retry or reload the page.

The session has been paused by the server.

Failed to resume the session.
Please retry or reload the page.