[CLSTR]
< Back to situation

[REVISION HISTORY]

Indian Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rulings

Updated 6 times since CLSTR started tracking revisions of this situation.

What changed

2026-09-03 06:34 UTC → 2026-09-03 14:33 UTC · added removed

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in India continues to issue diverse rulings addressing complex tax disputes, transfer pricing, and assessment procedures. In mid-August, the Hyderabad bench upheld a 16% profit estimation for Western Constructions on unverified seized material, while the New Delhi bench allowed Escorts Ltd to claim capital losses on unlisted shares. In Bangalore, the tribunal quashed a revision order against Karnataka Hitech Agro Enterprises regarding partner remuneration, and the Pune bench ruled in favor of Schlumberger India Technology Centre Private Ltd. regarding transfer pricing comparables. The Delhi ITAT also remanded an assessment for Hitachi Astemo Haryana Private Ltd. due to a failure to follow Dispute Resolution Panel directions. By late August, the Mumbai ITAT delivered a major ruling for Reliance Jio Infocomm, deleting a ₹11,003 crore disallowance by stating that accounting classifications do not unilaterally determine if expenses are capital or revenue. The tribunal also upheld the tax exemption status of the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI), ruling its services serve a “general public utility.” Other decisions included a Jaipur ruling that Section 69A additions require proof of ownership, and a Mumbai ruling that deposited TDS cannot be recovered as a principal liability. In early September, the Pune ITAT deleted a penalty against a Vodafone-Idea distributor, and ruling that recharge voucher values do not constitute business turnover for audit purposes. In Delhi, the Delhi ITAT deleted a ₹10.13 crore disallowance for Jammu Pigments Limited. Additionally, Limited, citing that the Delhi ITAT assessment relied on mere allegations of bogus purchases, and ruled that reassessment notices issued to deceased individuals are “void ab initio.” In Mumbai, a Tech Mahindra transfer pricing dispute was remanded for fresh benchmarking. Separately, Additionally, the Madras High Court set aside Delhi ITAT deleted a ₹1,91,60,000 addition against Isha Mehta regarding unsecured loans, finding the assessee provided necessary tax demand for a taxpayer unable to file returns due to technical portal failures. returns.

Versions

  1. 2026-09-03 14:33 UTC Indian Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rulings
  2. 2026-09-03 06:34 UTC Indian Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rulings
  3. 2026-08-26 04:28 UTC Indian Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rulings
  4. 2026-08-25 16:29 UTC Indian Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rulings
  5. 2026-08-25 16:29 UTC Indian Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rulings
  6. 2026-08-25 05:24 UTC Indian Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rulings
  7. 2026-08-18 20:01 UTC Indian Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rulings

Only revisions since CLSTR began indexing content versions appear here. Select a version to see what changed compared to the one before it.