Income Tax : ITAT rejected the assessee's contention of limited scrutiny, stating that the notice under section 143(2) did not specify such lim...
Income Tax : Chennai ITAT rules PCIT cannot expand limited scrutiny via Sec 263 in Cholan Paper vs PCIT case. Detailed analysis & conclusion. R...
Income Tax : ITAT Surat rules in Hasumatiben Jagdishbhai Patel vs. PCIT case, limiting further inquiry under Section 263 to issues directly con...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai rules no 263 revision for non-limited scrutiny issues. Upholds assessment order in Epimoney Pvt Ltd vs. ITO case for ...
Income Tax : In a recent case, ITAT Guwahati ruled on 'Income other than business/profession mismatch,' setting aside the assessment order. Det...
Income Tax : Government of India issues guidelines for compulsory selection of returns for Complete Scrutiny during FY 2023-24. Find the proced...
Income Tax : Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) released guidelines outlining the parameters and procedures for the compulsory selection of i...
Income Tax : CBDT Issues Guidelines for compulsory selection of Income Tax returns for Complete Scrutiny during the Financial Year 2022-23 and ...
M. M. Engineers and Consultants Vs PCIT (ITAT Cuttack) At the outset, a perusal of the balance sheet clearly shows that there is nothing in the balance sheet of the assessee under the term ‘sundry creditors’. We are alive to the fact that this is a limited scrutiny assessment, which is done under CASS. In […]
CBDT Issues Guidelines for compulsory selection of Income Tax returns for Complete Scrutiny during the Financial Year 2022-23 and procedure for compulsory selection in such cases vide Instruction No. F.No.225/ 81/2022/ITA-II Dated: 11th May, 2022. CBDT notifies Scrutiny criteria/Guideline for following parameters for compulsory selection of returns for Complete Scrutiny- 1. Cases pertaining to survey […]
SNS Constructions P. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) In this case there was a difference of Rs. 14,25,463/- between books of account and the payment received as per Form 26AS. The Assessing Officer treated the amount of Rs. 14,25,463/- as undisclosed receipts and added the same to the income of the assessee. Thereby the Assessing […]
Learned PCIT has exceeded her jurisdiction in examining issues other than the issues which is subject matter of limited scrutiny assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer.
A.O. has not made any addition/disallowance on those two counts for which the case was selected for limited scrutiny, but he has made certain additions on an issue which was not the subject matter of limited scrutiny and there is nothing on record to suggest that the A.O. has taken necessary approval from the PCIT/CIT for converting the limited scrutiny to full scrutiny. Therefore, on this issue also the A.O. is not justified in making the disallowance of interest expenditure.
ITAT find that order u/s 263 passed by PCIT dwelled into the issue of re-computation of capital gains which is beyond the mandate of limited scrutiny issued by CBDT. Hence, directions of PCIT are beyond selection criteria of scope of scrutiny for instant year cannot be held to be legally valid.
