Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that disallowance of agricultural expenses based on estimation is unsustainable without concrete evidence, rul...
Income Tax : Understand Section 139 of the Income Tax Act, its implications on return filing due dates, and the changes for FY 2023-24. Learn a...
Income Tax : Understand the concept of Updated Return under the Income-tax Act, its necessity, tax implications, and filing process. Get insigh...
Income Tax : Article explains What is Belated Return, limitations of filing Belated application, consequences when submitting Belated return an...
Income Tax : The Income-tax Act has prescribed time limit in respect of various procedures, applications, etc. (like time limit for filing an a...
Income Tax : ITAT Agra held that merely uploading of the communication in the Income Tax department e-portal is not sufficient mode of communic...
Income Tax : ITAT Agra held that ex-parte dismissal of appeal, as notices issued by CIT(A) were not compiled, without adjudicating issues on me...
Income Tax : Although Rule 128(9) requires Form 67, assessee’s compliance within this rule during the rectification stage demonstrated a good...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad condoned delay of nearly a decade in filing of an appeal since tax liability was fastened on the assessee without a...
Income Tax : Madras High Court held that delay in filing returns of income and seeking refund thereof is condoned in terms coverage within the ...
Income Tax : The due date of furnishing of Return of Income for the Assessment Year 2021-22, which is 31st July 2021 under sub-section (1) of s...
Income Tax : CBDT hereby authorises the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax/Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (NaFAC) having her / his headqua...
ITAT Agra held that merely uploading of the communication in the Income Tax department e-portal is not sufficient mode of communication in view provisions of Section 282 of the 1961 Act and Rule 127 of the Income Tax Rules.
ITAT Agra held that ex-parte dismissal of appeal, as notices issued by CIT(A) were not compiled, without adjudicating issues on merits is in violation of section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. Hence, order set aside and matter remitted back to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Although Rule 128(9) requires Form 67, assessee’s compliance within this rule during the rectification stage demonstrated a good faith or effort to fulfil procedural requirement.
ITAT Hyderabad condoned delay of nearly a decade in filing of an appeal since tax liability was fastened on the assessee without an authority of law and it is a well settled principle of law that unless authority of law, no tax can be collected.
Madras High Court held that delay in filing returns of income and seeking refund thereof is condoned in terms coverage within the scope of the expression ‘genuine hardship’ in section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act.
Gujarat High Court held that application filed u/s. 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act should be considered without adopting any pedantic technical approach. Accordingly, belated return filing permitted by exercising powers u/s. 119(2)(b).
ITAT Delhi held that it is proved that assessee doesn’t have any permanent establishment in India, during the year under consideration, accordingly, receipts classifiable as business income cannot be taxed in India.
ITAT Raipur held that belated return of income filed by payee u/s. 139(4) satisfies the 1st proviso to section 201(1) of the Income Tax Act hence assessee cannot be treated as ‘assessee in default’.
ITAT Bangalore held that as per provisions of section 44AA of the Income Tax Act, an agriculturist is not required to maintain books of accounts. Further, revenue has failed to establish anything contrary, accordingly, addition made on this count deleted.
ITAT Bangalore held that both AO and First Appellate Authority failed to conduct examination of cash deposit during demonetisation period in the light of CBDT instructions and hence matter remanded to that extent.
