Analysis of Leelaben Kantilal Parekh Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) case discussing the validity of a reopening notice under section 148 and addition under section 69C for bogus purchases.
ITAT Delhi held that AO is not justified in adding unsecured loan received u/s. 68 as AO has rejected the evidences furnished by the appellant without establishing falsity of the documents. Further, documents duly proved identities and source of investors.
In-depth analysis of the Income Tax Department crackdown in Chhattisgarh, uncovering a Rs. 13 crore scam involving a PEP, associates, and officials.
The Supreme Court emphasizes the need for courts to be vigilant against the misuse of the criminal justice system, highlighting a landmark judgment.
ITAT Mumbai held that initiation of reassessment proceedings on account of change of opinion formed on re-appraisal of the facts already on record and examined during the regular assessment proceedings is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Mumbai held that non-response to notice u/s. 133(6) of the Income Tax Act by some parties that does not prove that the entire transactions are bogus especially when all other documents to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the parties have been submitted
Explore the Jharkhand High Court’s decision in Pasari Casting vs. Income Tax Department, addressing a critical tax reassessment issue. A detailed analysis inside.
Explore the MCA adjudication order imposing penalties on Kudos Finance And Investments Private Limited for filing unsigned attachments to Form AOC-4, violating section 134(6) of the Companies Act, 2013.
Unveiling the Jharkhand High Court’s decision in Pasari Casting vs. IT Department, highlighting key aspects of tax law and principles of justice.
The Calcutta High Court quashes a prosecution report against a director in a liquor import case, highlighting legal nuances and implications for company liability.
