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 case examined whether compensation paid to exit prior agreements was a sham arrangement. The Tribunal ruled it was a valid bus...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that an unsigned agreement without corroboration cannot be treated as incriminating material. Proceedings under ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal deleted additions where the Revenue failed to prove actual cash transactions. It emphasized that suspicion and assump...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that loan repayment cannot be treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The addition was deleted as i...
Income Tax : Reassessment proceedings was invalid for a notice issued beyond three years without the sanction of the prescribed higher authorit...
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...
However, the completed/unabated assessments could be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under sections 147/148, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 and those powers were saved.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that AO had no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings u/s. 153C of the Income Tax Act beyond permissible period of six years from date of receipt of books/ documents by AO.
ITAT Hyderabad held that voluntary surrender of income in good faith cannot be considered as concealment of income. Hence, penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act cannot be sustained.
Delhi High Court held that that no notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act shall be issued if four years “but not more than six years” have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year.
ITAT Kolkata held that additions u/s. 153A of the Income Tax Act could only be made on the basis of seized material found during the course of search. Thus, making additions in regular assessment without any incriminating material relating to said addition not justified.
Karnataka High Court held that settlement commission, accepting additional income offered as reasonable and giving immunity from penalty and prosecution, by accepting the explanation ‘in the spirit of settlement’ cannot be faulted.
ITAT Pune remands the case of Suhas Maruti Dhankude for re-adjudication due to non-adjudication of jurisdictional grounds and failure to state point of determination.
ITAT Bangalore rules that deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) can’t be assessed by double deeming unless the assessee receives a direct benefit from the company’s payment.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that order of PCIT invoking section 263 of the Income Tax Act set aside as conditions necessary for invoking Section 263 of the Act, i.e., the order being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, are not satisfied.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition merely on the basis of retracted statement without any incriminating material seized from assessee’s premises is unsustainable in law and liable to be quashed.
