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 Tribunal held that the reassessment notice issued on 26.07.2022 was beyond the permissible timeline under the surviving limita...
Income Tax : The Andhra Pradesh High Court refused to quash summons issued under Section 131(1A) of the Income Tax Act, holding that allegation...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that the reassessment order could not be revised under Section 263 since the conditions for treating jewellery e...
Income Tax : The Bombay High Court held that the search authorisation under Section 132 was invalid because the satisfaction note lacked releva...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi upheld deletion of a Rs.6 crore addition under Section 68 after finding that the share sale transactions were prope...
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...
CBDT Instruction No. 1916 allowing the specific quantity as reasonable and need not to be explained, does not include the jewellery which is otherwise explained by proof of documents of acquisition as well as declared/ recorded in the books of account of the assessee.
Educate yourself on Income Tax Departments search and survey operations, crucial tools in combating tax evasion. Explore the powers and limitations under sections 132 and 133A, understanding when and how these operations are authorized. Learn about the circumstances, rights, and precautions associated with search and seizure procedures. Stay informed to ensure compliance and avoid legal repercussions.
B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) In absence of adverse material found during search, no addition could be made merely on the basis of statement recorded under section 132(4) of Income Tax Act, 1961 which did not constitute conclusive evidence and having been given under pressure was immediately retracted. Additions made u/s 153A […]
In case there was only a survey operation under section 131 and no proceedings were pending at that point of time in assessee’s case, exercising power of search under section 132 by income tax authorities without any satisfaction recorded either of non-cooperation of assessee or a suspicion that income had been concealed by assessee warranting resort to the process of search and seizure made the the process of search and seizure conducted as invalid and to be quashed .
Shri R. Bhoopathy Vs CIT (Madras High Court) he scourge of Capitation Fee by Medical and Engineering Colleges is an infamous and thoroughly extortionist act that is going on in the education sector in our country and it is almost a known fact that these so called Educational Institutions act more like Business Houses rather […]
DCIT Vs M/s. Deversons Industries Pvt.Ltd. (ITAT Ahmedabad) The Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings found that the vehicles were registered in the individual name of the Directors. But the assessee claimed the depreciation and the vehicle expenses in its income-tax return. However, the Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee cannot claim […]
Principal CIT Vs Manoj Hora (Delhi High Court) The text of section 132(4), clarifies that the presumption arises in the case of the searched party. In case the statements by the party whose premises are searched, or to be attributed to a third party – as in the case of the assessee, there has to […]
Retraction of statement after inordinate delay without proving that same was obtained forcefully/by coercion/undue influence is clearly an after-thought and looses its significance.
The present appeal arises out of the order dated 23rd February, 2007 in ITA No.236/2007 passed by the Delhi High Court whereby the High Court has held that no substantial question of law arose for its consideration and it was merely a matter decided on the evidence on record.
S. 68: Statements recorded u/s 132 (4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. A copy of the statement together with the opportunity to cross-examine the deponent has to provided to the assessee. If the statement is retracted and/or if cross-examination is not provided, the statement has to be discarded. The onus of ensuring the presence of the deponent cannot be shifted to the assessees. The onus is on the Revenue to ensure his presence
