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...
The case examined whether a reassessment notice issued after the Ashish Agarwal procedure complied with limitation rules. The court held the notice time-barred as it exceeded the surviving period under TOLA and quashed all proceedings.
The issue was whether the appellate authority relied on fresh evidence without following Rule 46A. The High Court upheld deletion of the addition, holding that all documents were already on record before the Assessing Officer.
The High Court upheld deletion of addition where the Assessing Officer relied on undisclosed information. The ruling reinforces that additions cannot be sustained without confronting the assessee with material evidence.
The Court examined whether denial of R&D approval for earlier years was justified despite later recognition. It directed authorities to reconsider applications afresh, stressing that prior years cannot be ignored without proper reasoning.
The issue was whether reassessment could be initiated without material showing income had escaped assessment. The Court held that mere allegations of circuitous transactions were insufficient. The key takeaway is that actual escapement is mandatory under the amended law.
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.
