Income Tax : The Income Tax Act, 2025 replaces old reassessment provisions with Sections 279 to 286 and increases reopening timelines in certai...
Finance : The amended Finance Bill 2026 abolishes the Tax Recovery Officer’s power to arrest and detain taxpayers for recovery of dues. Th...
Income Tax : The article explains why advertisement expenses for brand building remain deductible under Section 37. Courts have consistently ru...
Income Tax : The article explains how Section 115BAE offers newly established co-operative societies a concessional 15% tax rate for manufactur...
Income Tax : The Income-tax Act, 2025 replaces old Sections 68 to 69D with a simplified sequential structure under Sections 102 to 106. The cha...
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 : ITAT Delhi held that the assessee was covered under the search proceedings even though its name did not specifically appear in the...
Income Tax : Bangalore ITAT ruled that only solar days and not cumulative man-days should be considered while determining the existence of a Pe...
Income Tax : SC examined nature of amounts received from an AOP and upheld findings that receipts constituted profit share rather than revenue ...
Income Tax : The Rajasthan High Court held that the benefit of Section 115BAA could not be denied when Form 10-IC was filed within the period p...
Income Tax : The Court held that the petitioner had no connection with the entities or individuals from whose devices the disputed material was...
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...
Income Tax : The CBDT introduced Form ITR-U to allow taxpayers to update previously filed returns. The amendment promotes voluntary compliance ...
Income Tax : The CBDT has substituted the ITR-V form to strengthen verification of electronically filed returns. The amendment enhances accurac...
The SC refused to interfere with the High Court’s ruling that reassessment notices issued on incorrect facts and without supporting material were invalid. The key takeaway is that mechanical reopening cannot survive judicial scrutiny.
The Court held that reopening based on wrong assumptions about return filing and without supporting material is invalid. Mechanical recording of reasons cannot confer jurisdiction.
The case addressed the correct head of income for interest earned on staff loans. The court affirmed the Tribunal’s finding that such income arises in the normal course of business and found no ground to interfere.
The Court set aside a reassessment order passed in the name of a deceased assessee, holding that proceedings cannot continue after authorities are informed of death. Fresh proceedings may be initiated against legal representatives as per law.
The High Court upheld deletion of additions where share sale transactions were supported by contract notes, demat records, and bank statements, and no contrary evidence was found.
The Madras High Court held that companies could not file manual income-tax returns after e-filing became mandatory from May 14, 2007. A manual return filed for AY 2008–09 was held legally invalid.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that income disclosed under the VDIS does not prevent tax authorities from scrutinising returns where material shows higher undisclosed income. Immunity under the Scheme applies only to the income actually declared.
The Bombay High Court held that reassessment proceedings are invalid when notices are issued in the name of an entity that had ceased to exist, rendering the entire assessment void.
The government has notified income-tax exemption for specified welfare-related receipts, subject to strict non-commercial and compliance conditions.
Finding that the Assessing Officer acted beyond section 151A, the Court quashed the reopening notices. The ruling highlights that reassessment cannot proceed without valid jurisdictional foundation.
