Income Tax : Delhi HC rules in PCIT Vs Pavitra Realcon Pvt. Ltd., ITA 579/2018, emphasizing the need for corroborative evidence in tax assessme...
Income Tax : Understand the concept of Updated Return under the Income-tax Act, its necessity, tax implications, and filing process. Get insigh...
Income Tax : Explore Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, detailing search and seizure powers, authorizations, examinations, and rules for a tran...
Income Tax : Explore the Supreme Courts insights on Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing due process. Learn key takeaways, including...
Income Tax : In cases where a search under section 132 is initiated or a search for which the last of the authorization is executed or requisit...
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 : Delhi High Court dismisses Income Tax Department's appeal in PCIT Vs Satya Prakash Gupta case, finding no evidence of commission r...
Income Tax : Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) had authority to make additions to the declared income of taxpayers as ITSC's role was not...
Income Tax : Section 54 deduction was allowable on cash transactions involving residential property as it was ensured that genuine investments ...
Income Tax : Rajasthan HC rules that using the Insight Portal for reopening income tax assessments under Section 148 is valid. Learn about Chat...
Income Tax : Read the Kerala High Court judgment on income tax assessments involving Sunny Jacob Jewellers. Analysis includes AO's authority un...
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 Bangalore held that in case where AO of the searched person and the other person is the same, there can be one satisfaction note prepared by AO. Preparation of one satisfaction note will satisfy the requirement of section 153C of the Income Tax Act.
Explore Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, detailing search and seizure powers, authorizations, examinations, and rules for a transparent process
Delhi High Court halts NFRA proceedings against CA Unnikrishnan Menon, challenging show cause notice for irregularities in Quess Corp audit and TDS claim under Income Tax Act.
Karnataka High Court held that incorrect claim or erroneous claim would not amount to willful evasion. Further, mere fact of not accurate tax, not exact tax or erroneous tax would not lead to the proceedings under Section 276 of the Income Tax Act.
Explore the ITAT Mumbai order in Ankur Power Projects vs ITO. Learn why reassessment proceedings were quashed due to non-application of mind by the AO. Full text available.
ITAT Mumbai held that documents seized from employees cannot be considered as having any evidentiary value and cannot be considered to have trustworthiness, since no other corroborative material was brought on record to support the veracity of the same. Hence, documents seized from employees cannot be relied upon for denying exemption u/s 11.
Delhi High Court rules assessment can be reopened only with incriminating material found during Section 132 search. Details on Shyam Sunder Jindal vs ACIT case.
Explore the ITAT Delhi’s decision in Narinder Singh Punihani vs. DCIT case. No addition under Section 69A for wrist watches absence of bills. Full analysis and conclusion.
Jharkhand High Court drops criminal proceedings under CGST Act, Section 174 IPC. Summon duly replied. Analysis of the case – Satyendra Singh Kushwah vs. State of Jharkhand.
Since the legislature vested the discretion to extend the timeframe solely in the AO, he could not have abdicated that function and confined his role to only making a recommendation to the CIT. CIT had no role in extending the timeframe as the AO was in seisin of the assessment proceedings.
