Income Tax : This guide explains the penalty and prosecution framework under the Income-tax Act for AY 2026-27. It highlights the consequences ...
Income Tax : The Income Tax Department explains when interest is payable for delayed return filing, advance tax defaults, deferment of instalme...
Income Tax : The article explains how offences such as wilful tax evasion, failure to file returns, non-payment of TDS/TCS, falsification of re...
Income Tax : This article explains the advance tax provisions under the Income-tax Act, including liability thresholds, exemptions, and instalm...
Income Tax : This article outlines major offences under the Income-tax Act that may result in prosecution, including tax evasion, non-payment o...
Income Tax : Request to CBDT to permit filing of Form 10IC after expiration of time limit by condoning delay Issuance of Order under Section ...
Income Tax : All Odisha Tax Advocates Association has filed an PIl before Orissa High Court with following Prayers- (i) Admit the Writ Petition...
Income Tax : At the end of May the Income Tax Return forms are released for the Assessment Year 2015-16 and same been held back by finance mini...
Income Tax : ITAT held interest from head office and overseas branches is not taxable as payment to self, while interest from overseas banks al...
Income Tax : ITAT held an assessment passed after the taxpayer's death was invalid in law, quashed the order, and treated all remaining issues ...
Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur held that a one-day delay in filing Form 10DA could not defeat a Section 80JJAA deduction when the form was on record ...
Income Tax : Transfer pricing principles dictate that a captive, risk-mitigated service provider could not be benchmarked against full-fledged,...
Income Tax : ITAT held ₹33 crore settled rights over the entire land, allowing full indexed acquisition cost and rejecting proportionate rest...
Tribunal emphasizes requirement of notice under section 153C for assessments in block period, quashing AY 2021-22 assessment framed without jurisdiction.
The NFAC remitted a statutory authority’s taxability under Section 2(15) to the AO for fresh consideration. The assessee’s exemption claims under Sections 11 and 12 were disputed. The ruling ensures reassessment aligns with Supreme Court guidelines and provides a fair hearing.
ITAT Jaipur held that addition made on the basis of documents found from the third party without providing any opportunity of cross-examination is liable to be deleted on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice.
The decision highlights that additions under Section 153C cannot stand when based only on third-party statements without seized material linking the assessee. The ruling stresses the need for concrete evidence before treating purchases as non-genuine.
The Tribunal held that fractional or joint ownership in residential property does not violate the Section 54F condition unless the assessee is the exclusive owner. Deduction was allowed because co-ownership cannot trigger the proviso.
The Tribunal found that the authorities mechanically endorsed a factually incorrect premise, resulting in an unjustified DVO reference. Such a negligible 1.71% variation could not support an unexplained-investment addition under Section 69. Due to non-application of mind throughout the process, the 153A assessment was struck down entirely.
Professional and technical advisory services rendered from India to foreign clients in connection with overseas securities offerings qualify for deduction under Section 80-O as there was coordinate Bench’s decision in the assessee’s own case for AY 1995-96
ITAT held that managing multiple bank accounts justified salary expenses claimed under Section 57(iii). The ruling restores full deduction and reinforces that recurring administrative costs can be allowable against interest income.
The Tribunal reduced commission estimations for sale/purchase and loan entries to 0.40% and 0.50%, excluding intra-group transactions. This ensures compliance with judicial precedents and prevents arbitrary income additions.
Tribunal ruled that promotional scheme expenses were properly accrued and supported by evidence. Disallowance of ₹16.22 lakh was deleted, allowing assessee’s appeal.
