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 · 12 Mar 2021
    The allegation that some flats were sold at higher rate is vague and general in nature without bringing on record cogent material.

    Shivji Amba Gami Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29569 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  2. ITAT Mumbai · 02 Jul 2022
    Once a question of law was admitted by the HC in quantum proceedings, the issue becomes debatable and penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied.

    Linklaters Vs ADIT (IT)-3 (2)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29563 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  3. ITAT Mumbai · 01 Jul 2022
    When an opportunity of presenting the case, through the video conferring in the faceless appeal proceedings, is now available to every taxpayer, on-demand, the same must also be held to be admissible in the proceedings, if so demanded by the assessee, in the old rules as well.

    Bank of India Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29554 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  4. ITAT Mumbai · 30 Jun 2022
    Expenditure on account of purchase of shares issued as ESOP is revenue in nature, thus, allowable under Section 37(1).

    Morgan Stanley Advantage Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29548 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  5. ITAT Mumbai · 29 Jun 2022
    Profits of offshore supply cannot be said to be attributable to the PE merely because the sale were directly billed to the Indian Customer.

    Clough Projects International Pty. Ltd Vs DCIT(IT)-2(1)(1)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29540 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 44BB

  6. ITAT Mumbai · 28 Jun 2022
    Interest payment by PE to HO is a payment by a foreign company's Indian PE to the foreign company itself and cannot give rise to any income in the hands of HO.

    Shinhan Bank Vs Deputy Director of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29533 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 90(1)

  7. ITAT Mumbai · 28 Jun 2022
    Merely because the revisionary authority does not agree with the possible view taken by Revenue, the assessment cannot be the subject matter of revision. Therefore, PCIT erred in invoking revision proceedings.

    Learning Curve Edutech Solutions Pvt. Ltd Vs PCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29532 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  8. ITAT Mumbai · 12 Mar 2021
    Penalty cannot be automatic and every addition in the assessment proceedings cannot be gate way for levy of penalty.

    Nabors Drilling International Ltd. Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29508 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  9. ITAT Mumbai · 05 Mar 2021
    Unless a specific exception is provided in the circular w.r.t. penalty also, it could by no means be construed that penalty was to be treated at par with the quantum additions.

    Air Vision Technologies Vs Income Tax Officer

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29504 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  10. ITAT Mumbai · 03 Mar 2021
    Discount on issue of ESOP was allowable as deduction u/s.37(1) of the Act as primary object was not to vest capital but to earn profits by securing consistent services of employees.

    Mahindra Lifespace Developers Ltd Vs Dy.CIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29503 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 37(1)

  11. ITAT Mumbai · 26 Mar 2021
    License fee paid for purchases of software is not in the nature of royalty under India-Singapore DTAA and assessee is not liable to deduct TDS u/s 195.

    Reliance Corporate IT Park Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29484 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  12. ITAT Mumbai · 01 Apr 2021
    AO has merely acted on the basis of surmises and conjuncture in estimating 20% of the total receipt as unexplained cash credit. Therefore, the addition made upon the basis of guess work cannot be sustained.

    Nitta Jatiya (Alias Nita Jatia) Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29482 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  13. ITAT Mumbai · 01 Apr 2021
    When the order of the Pr.CIT under Sec. 263 had been quashed by the Tribunal, therefore, the disallowance of depreciation on goodwill made by the A.O by relying on the order passed by his predecessor under Sec. 143(3) r.w.s 263 cannot survive on a standalone basis and was liable to be vacated.

    FEDEX EXPRESS Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29479 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  14. ITAT Mumbai · 01 Apr 2021
    The conditions imposed in all the earlier stay orders shall remain intact. Both the parties shall make endeavour for early disposal of quantum appeal.

    Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Private Limited Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29462 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  15. ITAT Mumbai · 01 Apr 2021
    The addition has been confirmed in the absence of evidence from the assessee but this is not a case which would warrant levy of penalty either for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars.

    Mrs. Kavita Singh Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29460 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 271(1)(c)

  16. ITAT Mumbai · 22 Jun 2022
    In the guise of consistency, it can never be held that shares are intangible asset on which depreciation can be allowed u/s 32(1)(ii).

    Sanjana Cryogenics Storages Ltd Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29458 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  17. ITAT Mumbai · 09 Apr 2021
    Since the dividend income would be exempt in the hands of the assessee in terms of Sec. 10(34) r.w.s. 115-O, there would not be any requirement to file Income Tax Return for the assessee.

    Liston Investment Ltd Vs ITO-12(3)(3)

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29450 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Section 10(34)

  18. ITAT Mumbai · 09 Apr 2021
    Where, procedural rules result in miscarriage or travesty of its purpose, such rules sometimes have to be passed over in the larger interest of justice.

    Jaykrishna Dharmeshbhai Pathak Vs Income Tax Officer

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29443 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  19. ITAT Mumbai · 18 Jun 2022
    Even if the interest income is connected with the Assessee’s PE, it can only be brought to tax in India when the it is directly or indirectly attributable to the PE.

    Marubeni Corporation, Japan Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29425 (ITAT-MUMBAI)

  20. ITAT Mumbai · 18 Jun 2022
    Since the loan is repaid by the Assessee in AY 2013-14, therefore addition u/s 68 is being deleted and interest paid is allowable u/s 36(1)(iii).

    Talisman Securities Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT

    (2022) TaxCorp(LJ) 29423 (ITAT-MUMBAI) · Sections 68, 133(6)

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.