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 : Budget 2025 has brought significant simplification in the tax treatment of house properties, particularly for self-occupied proper...
Income Tax : Understand how to compute total income and tax liability under the Income Tax Act, including adjustments for business, capital gai...
Income Tax : Learn about income tax filing requirements for proprietors in the USA, including forms, schedules, deductions, deadlines, and pena...
Income Tax : Understand the changes to the Cost Inflation Index for FY 2024-25, including indexation removal on long-term capital gains and new...
Income Tax : Learn how international transactions are taxed under India’s Income Tax Act, including DTAAs, transfer pricing, TDS provisions, ...
Income Tax : CPC (TDS) reminds deductors to file TDS Statement 26Q for Q2 FY 2024-25. Late/non-filing may attract fees and affect TDS credit fo...
Income Tax : Union Cabinet has approved the new Income Tax Bill 2025, aiming to simplify and modernize India's tax system by replacing the 1961...
Income Tax : CBI registers case against 9, including Deputy Commissioner, 2 Inspectors, and 5 CAs, for sabotaging Faceless Tax Scheme; searches...
Income Tax : India's tax arrears stand at ₹47 lakh crore as of Dec 2024. CBDT & CBIC are taking steps, including asset identification, litiga...
Income Tax : India decriminalizes minor direct tax offenses to ease compliance. New measures include litigation management, compounding guideli...
Income Tax : Petitioner No.1 is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act of 1860 and the Bombay Public Trusts Act of 1950. It ...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that the expenditure incurred on CSR activities may not have direct nexus with the activities of the assessee but ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that sale of Dangerous Goods Regulations manuals could not be characterised as ‘royalty’ within the meaning o...
Income Tax : Orissa HC quashes criminal proceedings against Metaliks Ltd for delayed TDS deposit, citing financial distress and COVID-19 impact...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad rules in favor of Karimnagar DCCB, granting immunity from penalty under Section 270AA. The appeal challenges tax pe...
Income Tax : Notification No. 14/2025 updates Form 49C submission rules for liaison offices under the Income-Tax Act. Filing deadline set to 8 ...
Income Tax : CBDT amends Income-Tax Rules, 1962, updating regulations for Infrastructure Debt Funds, including investment criteria, bond issuan...
Income Tax : CBDT authorizes data sharing with DFPD to identify PMGKAY beneficiaries. MoU to govern data confidentiality, transfer mode, and ti...
Income Tax : BILL No. 14 OF 2025 THE FINANCE BILL, 2025 (AS INTRODUCED IN LOK SABHA) THE FINANCE BILL, 2025 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES ______ AS IN...
Income Tax : CBDT authorizes data sharing with the Dept. of Food & Public Distribution to identify beneficiaries under PMGKAY as per Income-tax...
ITAT Ahmedabad held In the case of Ashima Dyecot Limited vs. DCIT that interest on capital borrowed for plant & machinery which already has put to use for commercial production is allowed u/s 36 (1) (iii). In the given case,
ITAT Mumbai held in ITO Vs Legal Heir of Shri Durgaprasad Agnihotri that to respect the decision given by jurisdictional Hon’ble High Court in CIT vs. Ace Builders (P.) Ltd. [2006] 281 ITR 210 (Bom) it was upholding the decision given by CIT(A) that the exemption u/s 54EC
ITAT held in ITO Vs M/s.Last Peak Data Pvt. Ltd that if the assesse was an existing recognized Software Technology Park (STP) then it would be considered at par at of Special Economic Zone(SEZ) and exemptions available to SEZ would also be available to STP
ACIT vs Advert Communication ( ITAT Delhi) 1.If addition has to be made for bogus purchases then sales should also be disturbed ; 2.Until and unless both parties don’t confirm the cessation of liability then addition cannot be made u/s 41(1); 3.
JCIT Vs M/s Gillander Arbithnot & Co. Ltd (ITAT Kolkata) 1.Assessee would be allowed deduction of payment of employees contribution of ESI and PF if it paid the same before the due date of filing of return u/s 139(1). 2. Pooja & Temple expenses would be allowed as a business expenditure because it was related with the harmony of business so business expenditure.
ITAT Bangalore held in Sri Maramma Temple Seva Trust Vs CIT that even if the objective of an organization was both religious and charitable then also registration u/s 12AA could not be denied on the basis that registration could only be granted either to wholly religious
ITAT Chandigarh held In the case of M/s GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd vs. The JCIT that it is a settled law that an unascertained liability has to be allowed even if the same is quantified on a future date.
Instruction No. 16/2015 Sub-section (2) of Section 12AA of the Income-tax Act 1961 prescribes that every order granting or refusing registration under clause (b) of sub-section (I) of that Section shall be passed before the expiry of six months from the end of the month in which the application was received under clause (a) or clause (aa) of the sub-section (1) thereof. Thus while processing the application u/s 12AA of the Act, the time limit of six months has to be adhered to by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions). However, it has been brought to the notice of the Board that the said time limit has not been observed in some cases.
Where AO allowed interest on capital and remuneration paid to the partners from the estimated income on the basis of partnership deed, assessment made by AO on estimation of income could not be treated as erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of Revenue for invoking the jurisdiction under section 263.
Knorr-Bremse India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (P&H HC) A reading of the orders of the TPO, the DRP and of the Tribunal makes it clear that one of the main reasons for not accepting the assessee’s case was that the assessee had not been able to substantiate that the payment for the services had actually increased its profits.
