ITAT Amritsar held that reassessment proceedings were invalid because the reopening was based on factually incorrect AIR information. The Tribunal ruled that failure to verify bank records before issuing notice showed non-application of mind.
ITAT Chandigarh held that reassessment proceedings were invalid because the Assessing Officer relied on factually incorrect assumptions regarding the filing of return and property purchase. The reopening was therefore quashed as unsustainable in law.
ITAT Chandigarh held that reassessment proceedings were invalid because the Assessing Officer recorded incorrect facts regarding the return filing date and declared income. The Tribunal ruled that such defective reasons could not support a valid belief of escaped income.
Individuals who receive or transfer funds on behalf of others may face prosecution under various Indian laws. The article explains the legal risks, penalties, and regulatory consequences associated with money mule activities.
A comprehensive review of significant developments across Income Tax, GST, Customs, DGFT, SEBI, MCA, IBBI, and RBI. The update highlights important judicial decisions and regulatory changes issued during 25–31 May 2026.
The Income Tax Act, 2025 preserves the key deduction previously available under Section 80P through Section 149. Most tax incentives for eligible co-operative activities remain intact.
PFRDA has introduced a Regulatory Sandbox framework allowing controlled testing of innovative pension products and FinTech solutions. The framework balances innovation with strict safeguards for subscriber protection, cybersecurity, and regulatory compliance.
The India–Oman Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement became operational on 1 June 2026 after completion of required procedures. The agreement provides extensive market access across goods, services, investment, and professional mobility.
Karnataka AAR disposed of the application after the applicant informed that GST demand orders on the same issue were already under appellate consideration. No ruling was given on the merits.
The Supreme Court held that SEBI failed to establish fraud and market manipulation in RPL futures transactions. While disgorgement was quashed, penalties for violation of position-limit disclosure requirements were upheld.
