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 ITAT Ahmedabad held that isolated WhatsApp messages and electronic communications cannot, by themselves, support additions in ...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that penalty under Section 43 of the Black Money Act could not be imposed when foreign assets were subsequentl...
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 : 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...
During pendency of the assessment proceedings, respondent No.1 filed application u/s. 245C(1) before the Income Tax Settlement Commission offering additional income of Rs.17 Crores for the assessment years from 2011-12 to 2017-18.
Interest paid on late payment of TDS was not an expenditure wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of business and further it was a payment, which was in the form of tax, so it was not an allowable expenditure.
In pursuance of search, notice u/s.153A was issued and in response, assessee also filed its return of income. AO noted that assessee had taken loan from four parties during the years under consideration.
Bombay High Court held that once search action u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act is the foundation of the case, assessment could be initiated only under section 153A/ 153C. Thus, initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 is liable to be quashed.
Delhi High Court held that Section 153C as application at relevant time didn’t contemplate two tier recordal of satisfaction. Thus, proceedings u/s. 153C couldn’t have been triggered mechanically without formation of opinion by AO of non-searched person.
Bombay High Court held that reassessment proceeding u/s. 148 initiated against non-existing company is not sustainable in law in as much as the department was already informed about the merger. Accordingly, notice quashed.
Learn about ITR-U, a form for updating income tax returns. Understand eligibility, filing process, deadlines, and additional tax implications.
ITAT Jaipur rules that when search finds incriminating material, proceedings must be under Section 153C, not 147/148. Read case details of DCIT vs. Kailash Chand Hirawat.
ITAT Delhi held that loose sheets picked u/s 132, falls within definition of ‘document’ mentioned in section 132(4) and therefore, it has got evidentiary value. Thus, addition on the basis of loose sheets found during course of search is sustainable.
ITAT Hyderabad held that determination of sale consideration on the basis of some statements without bringing any concrete material in support of his claim, is not correct. Accordingly, addition is liable to be deleted and appeal filed by revenue dismissed.
