CA, CS, CMA : A comprehensive guide covering 175 legal compliances for July 2026 under FEMA, Income Tax, GST, SEBI, Companies Act, Labour Laws, ...
Income Tax : The Income-tax Act does not prescribe a single definition of "relative" for all purposes. Different provisions such as Sections 13...
Income Tax : Understand when 1% TDS applies on purchase of immovable property under Section 194-IA. Learn the Rs. 50 lakh threshold, compliance...
Income Tax : This guide explains when NRIs should use Form 128 and when payers should use Form 129 to reduce or eliminate excess TDS. It also c...
Income Tax : The article argues that Section 58(3) of the Income-tax Act, 2025 does not independently mandate books of account or tax audit for...
Income Tax : The issue was complexity in the existing tax law. It was clarified that the new Act simplifies structure by reducing sections and ...
Income Tax : This webinar breaks down the major structural and conceptual changes introduced in the new Income Tax Act, 2025. It helps professi...
Income Tax : The government informed Parliament that taxpayer-specific details of income tax searches cannot be disclosed due to confidentialit...
Income Tax : The Government clarified that the new income tax search provision does not expand powers or permit AI-based digital surveillance, ...
Income Tax : The representation highlights large-scale pendency and administrative bottlenecks under Sections 12AB and 80G, urging immediate re...
Income Tax : Madras HC set aside cognizance under the Income-tax Act, holding Section 223(1) BNSS mandates hearing the accused before cognizanc...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai quashed reassessment after finding no Section 143(2) notice and that the AO issued a final order disguised as a draft ...
Income Tax : Gujarat HC quashed a Section 148 notice, holding that a seized inquiry register without a live nexus to the assessee cannot justif...
Income Tax : Gujarat HC quashed Section 148 reassessment as it was issued beyond Section 149 limitation, holding Section 152(3) applies to sear...
Income Tax : Madras HC held that merely issuing a corrigendum acknowledging the return did not rectify the defective assessment process and ord...
Income Tax : CBDT has approved a scientific research institution under the Income-tax Act, 2025 for tax years 2026-27 to 2030-31. The notificat...
Income Tax : CBDT has approved the University of Hyderabad for scientific research under Section 45 of the Income-tax Act, 2025. The approval i...
Income Tax : The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) approved the company under Section 35(1)(iia) for scientific research ...
Income Tax : The government enforced a tax collection assistance agreement with Japan effective from 8 July 2025. The notification enables cros...
Income Tax : CBDT updated DIN rules to align with new provisions introduced under the Finance Act, 2026. The circular mandates DIN for most tax...
In the matter abovementioned ITAT directed the CPC to consider the due date as extended by the CBDT for the purpose of claim of exemption under section 11 & 12 of the IT Act. Assessee, being a society, filed its ITR for AY 2018- 19 after due date on 29.10.2018 along with audit re-port. Due to which exemption u/s 11 & 12 was denied by CPC.
ITAT Ahmedabad restored the matter back to AO for fresh adjudication but imposed cost of Rs. 10,000 for lack of diligence during assessment and appellate proceedings on the part of the assessee.
ITAT Delhi held that transfer of case of the assessee would not be permissible to another Assessing Officer without a decentralization order or transfer order under Section 127 of the Act is liable to be set aside on the ground of jurisdictional error.
It was claimed that the notice under Section 148 was time-barred, reasons recorded under Section 147 were vague, and proper show-cause notices were not issued, violating Section 144B.
Delhi High Court held that uploading of information by the investigation wing of the Income Tax department would not be a substitute for recording of a satisfaction note by the AO of searched person for handing over material to AO of person other than searched person.
Delhi High Court held that co-accused permitted to apply separately for compounding of offences committed by a Company or HUF. Accordingly, matter remitted back to decide afresh in light of CBDT circular dated 17.10.2024.
It was argued on behalf of assessee that PCIT is wrong in concluding that return filed u/s 44AD did not envisage the maintenance of any Books of Accounts. Section 68 can be invoked only if there is any entry in the Books of Accounts.
In the abovementioned case ITAT remanded the matter to CIT (A) after considering the fact that no proper opportunity was availed by assessee before CIT (A) and revenue has no objection in remanding the matter.
ITAT quashes S.263 revision order and annuls CIT(A) order in Kolet Resort Club Pvt Ltd case due to invalid assessment for AY 2015-16.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that inadvertent mentioning of wrong area in Form 10CCB resulted into denial of claim u/s. 80IC. Thus, clam allowed since it is proved that establishment of assessee exists in eligible area. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
