Get all latest income tax news, act, article, notification, circulars, instructions, slab on Taxguru.in. Check out excel calculators budget 2017 ITR, black money, tax saving tips, deductions, tax audit on income tax.
Income Tax : Explore India's digital taxation measures like Equalization Levy, Significant Economic Presence, and GST on online services. Learn...
Income Tax : Learn about ITR-U, a form for updating income tax returns. Understand eligibility, filing process, deadlines, and additional tax i...
Income Tax : This article explores the evolution of digital taxation, its implications for businesses and economies, the challenges associated ...
Income Tax : In this blog post here, we would like to address the impact of progressive taxation on income inequality in India with regard to t...
Income Tax : This blog compares the Old Tax Regime and New Tax Regime in detail, highlighting their key features and helping taxpayers make an...
Income Tax : Comprehensive list of 30 banks available at the e-Filing Portal's e-Pay Tax service. Find out the new and migrated banks, along wi...
Income Tax : Learn about advance tax, who needs to pay it, due dates, payment methods, penalties, and exceptions. Understand advance tax instal...
Income Tax : The Institute of Cost Accountants of India seeks inclusion of Cost Accountants in the definition of "Accountant" under Section 515...
Income Tax : Explore the Finance Bill 2025 highlights, including revised tax rates, TDS/TCS amendments, ULIP taxation, and updated rules for sa...
Income Tax : ICMAI addresses the non-inclusion of 'Cost Accountant' in the Income Tax Bill 2025. The Council is engaging with policymakers to e...
Income Tax : ITAT Surat remands penalty case under Section 271B to AO, ruling that bank transactions alone cannot determine turnover. Fresh con...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai restores MITC Metals case for fresh adjudication, ruling that assessment order was not void ab-initio despite ongoing ...
Income Tax : Explanation to Section 14A has only a prospective effect from April 1, 2022, and cannot be retrospectively applied to earlier asse...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad dismisses Somnath Kelavni Mandal's income tax appeal due to continuous absence in proceedings. Case pertains to une...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that provision of section 43A of the Income Tax Act not invocable when there is only reinstatement of fluctuation ...
Income Tax : Learn about high-risk transaction case verification, assessment, and proceedings under Sections 148/148A on the Insight and ITBA p...
Income Tax : Learn about high-risk CRIU/VRU case verification, assessment, and proceedings under Sections 148/148A on the Insight and ITBA port...
Income Tax : Learn about suspected benami, undisclosed foreign assets, and TDS compliance cases assigned under Risk Management Strategy via the...
Income Tax : The IT Dept. has flagged high-risk non-filers for AY 2019-22 on the Insight Portal under RMS Cycle 5. Assessing Officers can revie...
Income Tax : Delhi Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board receives tax exemption on cess, fees, and interest income under Sectio...
The non-availability or non-association of independent witness cannot be a ground for discharge or acquittal in all cases. It would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidentiary value of the prosecution witnesses could not be undermined at the stage of framing of charges. It is moreso when the prosecution has cited some panch witnesses to be examined in support of its case. The impugned order discharging the accused/respondents apparently suffers from illegality and has caused miscarriage of justice. At the stage of charge, what is to be seen by the Trial Court was laid down by the Supreme Court in the catena of judgments. Reference is made to the judgment in case State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh, AIR 1977 SC 2018.
In our order in AAR No.1009 of 2010 (SEPCO III Electric Power Corporation), we had taken the view that if the applicant before this Authority had already filed a return of income involving the amount arising out of the identical transaction on which a question for our ruling is raised by filing an application under section 245Q(1) of the Income-tax Act, the application before the Authority for Advance Rulings will be barred by the clause (i) of the proviso to section 245R(2) of the Act and the application will have to be rejected. On an application made by the applicant therein before this Authority to review or reconsider the correctness of that view, after considering the relevant aspects pointed out, this Authority again reiterated its view. The correctness of this view so taken is again sought to be canvassed in this Application and the other Applications heard along with it containing similar fact situation.
A reshuffle of charge of three members of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) was effected today. In today’s reshuffle K Madhavan Nair got Investigations in place of Legislation and Computerisation (L and C) while S S Rana was shifted from Investigations to Income Tax and Poonam Kishore Saxena got L and C. She earlier held the charge of Audit and Judicial.
There is no reason and justification to hold that clause (iii) of the Explanation intents to reduce or restrict the indexed cost of acquisition’ to the period during which the assessee has held the property and not the period during which the property was held by the previous owner.
Centre has moved the Supreme Court seeking review of its verdict on the Income Tax issue of Vodophone . The court had earlier held that the Indian Income Tax Department does not have jurisdiction to levy 11,000 crore as tax on the overseas deal between Vodafone International Holdings and Hutchison Group.
After 1-4-1989, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable. It is enough if the bad debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee, subject to the provisions of section 36(2) that such debt or part thereof has been taken into account in computing the income of the assessee of the previous year in which the amount of such debt or part thereof is written off or of an earlier previous year. As the appellant has shown the amount of Rs.23,00,894/- (claimed as short recoveries or bad debts written off) as its income in assessment years 2007-08 & 2008-09, the conditions laid down in the provisions of section 36(1 )(vii) read with section 36(2) of the Act have been fulfilled by the appellant. In these circumstances, it is held that the contention of the appellant is correct. The Assessing officer is accordingly directed to delete the addition ofRs.23,00,894/-.
Kirti Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi) – The remand report submitted by AO does not deny the fact that Mr. Jagdish Beniwal was acting as a coordinator for facilitating the purchase of pieces of lands in Alwar for and on behalf of the assessee. It has also not been denied that assessee did not give advance imprest money to him. Mr. Jagdish Beniwal has accepted that he used to assist assessee and thereafter the assessee was dealing with farmers directly. This does not rule out his role as a coordinator till the conveyances were registered. In his statement he has himself accepted having received an amount of Rs. 60,00,000/- from assessee and about the cash disbursement on pertinent question,
In re Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Pty. Ltd.(AAR) – We find from the decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. M/s. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd (ITA No. 2808 of 2005) and connected cases that that High Court has held that in that case, the argument that it would be only a sale of copy of the copyright software could not be accepted.
Notification No. 9/2012-Income Tax In exercise of the power conferred by sub-section (IC) of section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby exempts the following class of persons, subject to the conditions specified hereinafter, from the requirement of furnishing a return of income under sub-section (1) of section 139 for the assessment year 2012-13
ITO Vs. Kuber Chand Sharma, In our considered view, CIT(A) has admitted the additional evidence without fulfilling the categorical conditions laid down in Rule 46A, as explained by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Manish Build Well Pvt. Ltd.(supra). Consequently, his order on this issue is not tenable, however, the issue of merits remains. Besides, from the record it emerges that the assessee wanted to file only government records and revenue record about crops. In the entirety of facts and circumstances, the interest of justice will be served if the matter is set aside, restored back to the file of AO to decide the same afresh after affording the assessee sufficient opportunity of being heard.
