Income Tax : Discover pivotal case of Uttrakhand Poorv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. vs ITO, where ITAT Dehradun established that Section 142(1) and...
Income Tax : Finance Act, 2023 introduced amendments to Section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This article provides an overview and anal...
Income Tax : Understand the implications of Income Tax Act Sections 142 and 142A, covering notices to submit returns, making inquiries, and pro...
Income Tax : Explore the nuances of Income Tax Notices under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Learn when these notices are issued, h...
Income Tax : Budget 2021- Allowing prescribed authority to issue notice under clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 142 Section 142 of the A...
Income Tax : Oracle India has approached Delhi High Court challenging the order of the government which had asked it to undertake a special aud...
Income Tax : Sub-sections (2A) to (2D) of section 142 deal with power of Assessing Officer to order a special audit. Such power is required to ...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that PCIT cannot exercise revisionary power u/s. 263 to restore an issue for the purpose of verification only ...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that disallowance of delayed payment of employees’ contribution to EPF and ESI in terms of section 143(1) of...
Income Tax : In Peter Vaz vs CIT, Bombay HC rules ITAT erred in barring Sec 153C challenge & refusing delay condonation. Cites Rule 27, Balakr...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court held that re-opening of assessment solely relying upon information made available on the insight portal, withou...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that addition on the basis of loose papers and documents found from the premises of third party is not tenable...
Income Tax : CBDT hereby authorises the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax/Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (NaFAC) having her / his headqua...
Income Tax : It has also been brought to notice of the Board that in some cases, the address of transacting parties given in AIRs is not comple...
ITAT Ahmedabad held that PCIT cannot exercise revisionary power u/s. 263 to restore an issue for the purpose of verification only since restoring matter for verification means that PCIT is not sure of assessment order being erroneous causing prejudice to the revenue.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that disallowance of delayed payment of employees’ contribution to EPF and ESI in terms of section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act can be made based on auditor’s observation. Accordingly, disallowance upheld.
In Peter Vaz vs CIT, Bombay HC rules ITAT erred in barring Sec 153C challenge & refusing delay condonation. Cites Rule 27, Balakrishnan (SC). Matter remanded.
Gujarat High Court held that re-opening of assessment solely relying upon information made available on the insight portal, without forming any independent opinion, is unsustainable in law and hence liable to be quashed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that addition on the basis of loose papers and documents found from the premises of third party is not tenable in the eye of law. Accordingly, appeal of the revenue is dismissed since addition not based on substantial evidence.
Addition based on the District Valuation Officer’s (DVO) report, which exceeded the stamp duty value was upheld as assessee challenged to DVO’s valuation was arbitrary without any supporting evidence.
Delhi High Court held that initiation of re-assessment proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act against merged company is invalid as company is dissolved after Scheme of Arrangement. Thus, writ petition is allowed and notice/ order quashed.
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.
ITAT Mumbai held that once the assessee is dead no valid assessment or reassessment can be made in the name of the deceased. Thus, notice issued u/s. 148 upon the deceased assessee who expired prior to issuance of notice is invalid.
ITAT Pune held that delay in filing audit report in Form 10CCB due to technical problem is justifiable and hence denial of claim under section 80IAC of the Income Tax Act not justified. Accordingly, order set aside to AO to consider audit report.
