Income Tax : The ruling clarifies that unauthenticated digital chats and screenshots cannot form the sole basis of tax additions without proper...
Income Tax : Judicial rulings clarify that satisfaction for initiating action against other persons in search cases must be recorded promptly. ...
Income Tax : Section 270A penalties must specify the exact misreporting clause. Vague notices invalidate penalties and can restore immunity und...
Income Tax : Understand the three core processes of Indian Income Tax: Rectification of mistakes (Sec 154), the four types of Assessment (Summa...
Income Tax : Understand your legal rights and procedural protections during Income Tax and PMLA raids in India. Learn what to do and what to a...
CA, CS, CMA : Legal opinion sought by NFRA on auditing standards, penalties, and regulatory roles in India. Analysis of NFRA’s powers under th...
Income Tax : Learn about the new block assessment provisions for cases involving searches under section 132 and requisitions under section 132A...
Goods and Services Tax : The Ministry of Finance reports the arrest of a firm's finance head for GST evasion worth Rs 88 crore. Learn about the case and it...
Income Tax : The Central Board of Direct Taxes ( CBDT) has directed re-opening of all cases under the search and seizure label, income-escapin...
Income Tax : The Hyderabad Bench emphasized that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed solely because an addition survives appellat...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that Section 263 cannot be invoked where the assessee never claimed the alleged expenditure as a deduction. With...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that proportionate interest disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) cannot be sustained when the assessee has ade...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that Section 263 does not permit the PCIT to substitute his opinion for that of the Assessing Officer when two ...
Income Tax : Additions made by attributing the commission income earned by PSPL as undisclosed income of the Assessees were held unsustainable ...
Income Tax : Read the order issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), Ministry of Finance, specifying the scope of the e-Appeals Sche...
Income Tax : Dispute arose between the Department and the assessees with regard to adjustment of such seized/requisitioned cash against advance...
ITAT Mumbai deleted Section 69 addition on alleged on-money, holding third-party statements and unverified pen drive data lack evidentiary value without corroboration or cross-examination, upholding natural justice.
The tribunal ruled that revisionary powers cannot be exercised without questioning the statutory approval under Section 153D. Absence of such examination renders Section 263 action invalid.
ITAT ruled that interest disallowance cannot be made when sufficient interest-free funds are available. The key takeaway is that availability of own funds overrides assumptions of borrowed fund usage.
The Court held that the notice issued after six years from the relevant assessment year was barred by limitation. The reassessment proceedings were set aside.
The Tribunal confirmed addition of unexplained investments where the assessee could not substantiate the source of deposits. The ruling reinforces the burden of proof on the taxpayer.
The case examined whether purchases can be disallowed when supported by documents and sales are accepted. ITAT held that estimation without rejecting books or independent evidence is unsustainable.
The case examined whether compensation paid to exit prior agreements was a sham arrangement. The Tribunal ruled it was a valid business decision that enabled higher sale consideration.
The Tribunal held that an unsigned agreement without corroboration cannot be treated as incriminating material. Proceedings under section 153C were declared invalid.
The Tribunal deleted additions where the Revenue failed to prove actual cash transactions. It emphasized that suspicion and assumptions cannot replace evidence. The ruling protects taxpayers from arbitrary additions.
The Tribunal held that loan repayment cannot be treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The addition was deleted as it was based on incorrect classification of repayment as fresh loan.
