The ITAT upheld deletion of the Section 69A addition after finding that the bank credits were satisfactorily explained as insurance premium collections and related transactions. It held that the Revenue failed to produce evidence contradicting the assessee’s explanation.
This guide explains when Section 206AA requires TDS at a higher rate due to non-furnishing of PAN and the applicable exceptions. It also highlights the reduced rate available for deductions under Sections 194-O and 194Q.
Learn how TDS on rent is governed under Sections 194-I and 194-IB, including eligibility, deduction rates, thresholds, and compliance requirements. The guide explains when TDS applies and the procedures for deduction and deposit.
Tribunal held that final assessment order was time-barred because it was passed after mandatory period prescribed under Section 144C(13). Assessment was set aside, making remaining transfer pricing issues academic.
The Gauhati High Court held that a service tax demand based only on Form 26AS, without examining the nature of services or taxability, is unsustainable. The Court quashed the tax demand, interest, and penalties.
This guide explains the applicability of TDS under Section 194Q and TCS under Section 206C(1H), including thresholds, rates, and compliance requirements. It also clarifies which provision prevails when both sections apply to the same transaction.
The ITAT held that a transfer pricing order issued without authentication or a digital signature is invalid in law. Consequently, it quashed the ₹85 crore transfer pricing adjustment and allowed the assessee’s appeals.
The ITAT held that an opening cash balance cannot be treated as unexplained merely because the previous year’s income tax return reflected nil cash. It deleted the addition after accepting the assessee’s explanation regarding accumulated withdrawals from taxed income.
This guide explains who is required to maintain books of account under Section 44AA based on business, profession, turnover, and income thresholds. It also outlines the consequences of non-compliance and the prescribed record-keeping requirements.
The ITAT held that the Assessing Officer disallowed interest expenditure without adequately verifying the records or confronting the assessee. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity of hearing.
