Taxpayers now get three extra months to correct mistakes in originally filed income tax returns. The revised return mechanism remains useful for correcting errors like missed income, deduction mistakes, and wrong capital gains reporting.
ITAT held that loose sheets showing cash and cheque transactions could not justify additions under Section 153A where related cheque transactions were accepted as genuine and linked to group business dealings.
Service exporters must file monthly EDF declarations from October 2026 under new FEMA regulations. Non-compliance may affect eBRC generation, GST refunds, and FEMA compliance.
Telangana High Court declined to examine the GST rate dispute in writ jurisdiction, holding that the matter required factual scrutiny of agreements and notifications. The petitioner was directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107.
Taxpayers with foreign assets, high income, capital gains, or business complexities cannot file simplified ITR forms. Using the wrong form may result in defective returns and compliance notices.
The ITAT held that a penalty notice without specifying whether the case involved under-reporting or misreporting of income is legally unsustainable. The Tribunal ruled that such defective notices are void-ab-initio and cannot support penalty proceedings.
The article explains the legal framework, procedural requirements, and statutory compliances governing buy back of shares under the Companies Act, 2013. It highlights approval limits, filing requirements, solvency conditions, and methods of buy back.
The article explains that Section 67(4) permits sealing only for facilitating GST searches where access is denied, not for indefinite business closure. Courts have stressed proportionality and timely de-sealing to protect business operations.
The ITAT Bangalore held that advances written off were allowable as bad debts since the assessee was engaged in financing and lending activities as part of its regular business operations.
The Supreme Court held that limitation cannot be treated as a preliminary issue under Section 9A of the CPC because it does not affect the courts jurisdiction to entertain a suit. The ruling clarified that Section 9A applies only to defects relating to the courts competence to receive the suit.
