Income Tax : Understand the statutory time limits for issuing income-tax notices and completing assessments under the Income-tax Act. The guide...
Income Tax : Learn the updated provisions governing rectification, assessments, reassessments, and appeals under the Income-tax Act. This guide...
Income Tax : Learn how different types of income tax assessments are conducted under the Income-tax Act. The FAQs explain assessment procedures...
Income Tax : This guide explains the various assessments under the Income-tax Act, including summary assessment, scrutiny assessment, best judg...
Income Tax : The new Income-tax Act, 2025 replaces the old survey framework with a streamlined regime under Section 253. It expands digital rec...
Income Tax : Read KSCAA's representation to the Commissioner of Income Tax, addressing practical issues faced by taxpayers and suggesting solut...
Income Tax : In view of Indiscriminate notices by income Tax Department without allowing reasonable time it is requested to Finance Ministry an...
Income Tax : Lucknow CA Tax Practicioners Association has made a Representation to FM for Extension of Time Limit for Assessment cases time bar...
Income Tax : While uploading Manual order for the A Y 2017-18 user is getting the following message: Manual Order cannot be uploaded for this P...
Income Tax : Tax collections increased from Rs 6.38 Lakh Crore in year 2013-14 to almost Rs 12 Lakh Crore this year 80% growth in tax base; n...
Income Tax : The Tribunal admitted a new legal ground and held that jurisdictional defects can be raised at any stage. It quashed the assessmen...
Income Tax : The ITAT has declared an assessment against SoftwareONE India Pvt. Ltd. void, ruling that an assessment framed in the name of a no...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court directs acceptance of Acuity KP Solutions' tax return and refund, citing time-barred assessment proceedings after...
Income Tax : In a case of BVM Global Education Trust vs Assessment Unit, Madras High Court declares computation sheet and demand notice invalid...
Income Tax : Read about the Madras High Court's order for rectification of an income tax assessment order regarding addition on sale considerat...
Income Tax : A CAG audit report on direct taxes for FY 2022-23 reveals over ₹7,929 crore in tax effect from 481 observations, highlighting as...
Income Tax : Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Assessment Unit (AU), Verification Unit (VU), Technical Unit (TU) and Review Unit (RU) unde...
Income Tax : CBDT hereby specifies that all the assessment proceedings pending as on 31.03.2021 and the assessment proceedings initiated on or ...
Income Tax : Faceless Appeal Scheme has been implemented in ITBA and the allocation of cases to Faceless Appeal units is under progress. A numb...
Income Tax : CBDT notifies Prescribed Authority under Section 133C with effect from 13th August, 2020 vide Notification No. 66/2020, Dated: Aug...
If the assessing officer is going to make good an omission on the part of the assessee, he must be expressly authorised by law to do so lest he is hauled over coals for cosying up to the assessee. The recent Supreme Court verdict in Goetz (India) Ltd vs CIT (284 ITR 323), tersely dismissing the appeal of the assessee against the order of the assessing officer (AO) not allowing a deduction which it was admittedly entitled to under Chapter VI-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 but which it had not claimed by even filing the revised return, is unexceptionable though it has come in for criticism from some quarters.
NABARD Rural Bonds of National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) have been notified. The notification will take effect from the 1st April, 2008 and will, accordingly, apply in relation to the assessment year 2008-2009 and subsequent years .
Section 80C of the Income-tax Act provides for a deduction of up to Rs. One lakh to an individual or a Hindu undivided family (HUF) for:- (i) making investments in certain savings instruments; or (ii) incurring expenditure on tuition fee and repayment of housing loan.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi IV v. Insilco Ltd. – Section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Depreciation – Allowance/rate of – Assessment year 1999-2000 – Whether in view of decision of Delhi High Court in CIT v. Woodward, Governor India (P.) Ltd. [2007] 162 Taxman 60, Tribunal was correct in allowing depreciation to assessee on increase in cost of plant and machinery due to increased liability on account of foreign exchange rate fluctuation on last date of accounting year – Held, yes
Rolls Royce Plc vs. DDIT (ITAT Delhi) – jurisdiction u/s 147 can be exercised even on the basis of a prima facie opinion (ii) On facts, the wholly owned subsidiary constituted a ‘business connection’ as well as a ‘permanent establishment’ (iii) the total profits of the enterprise have to be apportioned on the basis of various factors affecting accrual of income. First, the economically significant activities and responsibilities (in the context of activities and responsibilities undertaken by the enterprise as a whole) undertaken through the PE have to be identified through a functional and factual analysis.
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in confirming the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)’ view that deduction under section 36(1) (viii) of transfer of reserve at 40 per cent, was to be worked out on the gross total income before making deduction under this section as well as under Chapter VI-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961?
RBF Rig Corpn. LIC (RBFRC) v. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) -Section 10(10CC) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Perquisite, not provided by monetary payment – Assessment year 2004-05 – Whether payment of tax on behalf of employee at option of employer is a non-monetary perquisite fully covered by sub-clause (iv) of clause (2) of section 17 and, thus, exempt under section 10(10CC) and is not liable to be included in total income of employee – Held, yes – Whether taxes paid by employer can be added only once in salary of employee and thereafter, tax on such perquisite is not to be added again – Held, yes
The author has made a critical analysis of the recent decision of the Kolkota Bench of the ITAT in Van Oord Atlanta B.V. 112 TTJ 229 and identified the important principles of law emerging therefrom. 1. 1. Factual Synopsis of the case 1.1 Van Oord Atlanta B.V. (‘Assessee’) a company incorporated in Netherlands and a resident of that country was accordingly treated as eligible to benefits of ‘DTAA’.
Under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has the power to rectify mistakes in its order. However, the power to rectify a mistake is not equivalent to a power to review or recall the order sought to be rectified. Rectification is a species of the larger concept of review. Although it is possible that the prerequisite for exercise of either power may be similar to rectifying a mistake apparent from the record, by its very nature, the power to rectify a mistake would not result in the recall and review of the order sought to be rectified. This was held by the Delhi High Court in C.I.T. v Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages P Ltd (293 I.T.R. 163).
Principles for reckoning of limitation period for completion of block assessment under provisions of S 158 BE- conclusive proof is required to show that seized documents disclose concealment of any income but assessee and not disclosed – ITAT
