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 : Understand the updated TDS rates for FY 2025-26 (AY 2026-27). Comprehensive chart covering salary, interest, dividends, rent, and ...
Income Tax : Budget 2025 revises income tax slabs, making ₹4,00,000 tax-free. New rates range up to 30% for income above ₹24,00,000. Key de...
Income Tax : Income tax bill, 2025 aims to replace Income Tax Act, 1961, simplifying tax laws. Questions arise about its impact on revenue, lit...
Income Tax : Income Tax Bill 2025 introduces changes to TDS, TCS, and LRS provisions, raising threshold limits and reducing compliance burdens....
Income Tax : CIT International Tax- 1 Vs Expeditors International of Washington INC (Delhi High Court); ITA 202/2022; Dated: 13/02/2025 In a si...
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 : Lok Sabha issues corrigenda for the Income-tax Bill, 2025, correcting references, formatting, and legal citations. Read the key am...
Income Tax : KSCAA's representation to CBDT highlights challenges in the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024, focusing on delayed appeals and suggesti...
Income Tax : Bombay HC rules in CIT vs. Nitish Chordia that agricultural land distance must be measured by road, not aerial view, impacting cap...
Income Tax : ITAT Surat rules that for capital gains tax on agricultural land, municipal limits are determined by notification in force at the...
Income Tax : ITAT remands case regarding taxability of interest income earned before business commencement, citing need for fresh adjudication ...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court rules reassessment proceedings against Alok Industries invalid post-resolution plan approval under IBC, citing S...
Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur dismisses Bansi Lal's appeal, upholding additions for unexplained bank deposits and interest income. Tribunal cites l...
Income Tax : Key updates on income tax deduction from salaries under Section 192 for FY 2024-25, including amendments, surcharge rates, and new...
Income Tax : CBDT extends the due date for filing Form 56F under Section 10AA(8) and 10A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to March 31, 2025, for...
Income Tax : The Central Government notifies Punjab RERA for tax exemption under Section 10(46A) of the Income-tax Act, effective from the 2024...
Income Tax : The Indian government is set to introduce the new Income Tax Bill, 2025, in the Lok Sabha on February 13, 2025. This comprehensive...
Income Tax : Bhaikaka University, Gujarat, is approved for scientific research under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, effective f...
Recently, ITAT Mumbai (the Tribunal) in case of ACIT v. ACM Shipping India Ltd (2011) ITA No. 5085/MUM/2009 held that the commission received by the UK company for assisting the taxpayer in arranging cargo transportation was taxable as business income by virtue of their business connection in India. The Tribunal observed that reliance cannot be placed on Circular No. 23 dated 23 July 1969 since it has been withdrawn. The circular was issued in the context of sale of goods and may not apply to the current case since it relates to rendering of services.
The Government of India signed a Protocol, amending Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) with Government of Singapore for effective exchange of information in tax matters today. The Protocol was signed by Shri Prakash Chandra, Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) on behalf of the Government of India and Ms. Karen Anne Tan Ping Ming, High Commissioner of Singapore to India, on behalf of the Republic of Singapore.
CIT Vs H.P. Marketing Board (Himachal High Court)- Marketing board is not a local authority within the meaning of section 10(20) prior to the amendment made in section 10(20) when the word `local authority’ was not defined in the Income tax Act and the definition of `local authority’ as defined in section 3(31) of the General Clause Act was applicable.
The CBI is likely to receive by next week the documents it sought from Mauritius through Letter Rogatory in connection with the companies allegedly involved in the 2G spectrum allocation scam. Sources in the probe agency said some parts of the documents have been handed over to Indian High Commissioner in Mauritius by the local authorities, while some more are expected soon which will be forwarded to the CBI.
India today asked the US to move ahead with an agreement which would exempt professionals from payment of security taxes to mitigate the impact of a visa fee hike last year. Both the sides are negotiating Bilateral Totalisation Agreement (BTA), which once signed, would benefit lakhs of Indians who are working in America and paying social security but are unable to get any benefit out of it.
M/s Prajna Technologies & Services Private Limited vs. DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) – Observing the nature of business, the taxpayer never sold the right to carry on the business of its software development or its right to carry on any business. It had merely sold a specific sale contract with a client, which is routine outsourcing in all businesses. The provision of Section 55(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 would be applicable in the present case and accordingly the transaction would fall under the ambit of the expression “right to manufacture, produce or process any article or thing”. The said expression was inserted by the Finance Act 1997 w.e.f. 1 April 1998. Hence, the contention of the taxpayer that the amendment to Section 55(2)(a) bringing the transfer of commercial right to capital gain tax is effective from the AY 2003-04 and not 2002-03 is not tenable. Hence the transfer of a specific sale contract is taxable as capital gains under Section 55(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Notification No. 36/2011 – Income Tax Exemption u/s 139(1) to Specified Person from the requirement of furnishing a return of income for Assessment year 2011-12. An Individual whose total income for the relevant assessment year does not exceed five lakh rupees and consists of only income chargeable to income-tax under the following head,—(A) ‘Salaries’; (B) ‘Income from other sources’, by way of interest from a savings account in a bank, not exceeding ten thousand rupees.
Individuals having total income up to Rs. 5,00,000 for FY 2010-11, after allowable deductions, consisting of salary from a single employer and interest income from deposits in a saving bank account up to Rs. 10,000 are not required to file their income tax return. Such individuals must report their Permanent Account Number (PAN) and the entire income from bank interest to their employer, pay the entire tax by way of deduction of tax at source, and obtain a certificate of tax deduction in Form No.16.
Notification No. 35/2011 – Income Tax CBDT has vide Notification No. 35/2011 In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (v) of explanation to section 48 of the Act, CBDT has notified 785 as the cost inflation index, in respect of computation of gains arising on the transfer of long term capital asset. The said inflation index is applicable for financial year 2011-12.
Dalal Broacha Stock Broking Pvt Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai – Special Bench)- Provisions of section 36(1)(ii) will apply in case of all employees including share holder employees irrespective of the fact whether any extra services have been rendered or not. The issue whether payment of bonus or commission to an employee will be covered by the provisions of section 36(1)(ii) or section 37(1) is also settled by the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Subodh Chandra Poppatlal vs. CIT (24 ITR 586) in which the Hon’ble High Court while dealing with similar provisions of the old Act held that when an expenditure fell under section 10(2)(x) [which corresponds to section 36(1)(ii)], in the sense that it is an expenditure in the nature of bonus or commission paid to an employee for services rendered then its validity can only be determined by the tests laid down in section 10(2)(x) and not by the tests laid down in section 10(2)(xv) which corresponds to section 37(1).
