Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
Income Tax : Learn the updated provisions governing rectification, assessments, reassessments, and appeals under the Income-tax Act. This guide...
Income Tax : The article explains how the Finance Acts, 2025 and 2026 have reshaped the Updated Return regime under Section 139(8A). It highlig...
Income Tax : The article explains that 30 June is the Department's deadline to issue scrutiny notices for eligible returns, not a filing deadli...
Income Tax : The Income Tax Department explains how faceless assessments under Section 144B operate through the e-Filing portal without requiri...
Income Tax : Read how Income Tax Gazetted Officers’ Association addresses last-minute case reallocations affecting timely issuance of notices...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court has ruled that it is mandatory for the Income Tax Department to issue notice within the prescribed time limit of...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai remanded the case to examine whether Section 56(2)(x) applied based on the agreement date and to consider refund of ex...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai deleted a Section 69 addition after finding documentary evidence established joint ownership, source of funds, and ear...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai quashed reassessment after finding no Section 143(2) notice and that the AO issued a final order disguised as a draft ...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held Section 68 inapplicable where shares were disclosed in an earlier year and sale proceeds were already offered as i...
Income Tax : Madras HC held that merely issuing a corrigendum acknowledging the return did not rectify the defective assessment process and ord...
Income Tax : Understand the guidelines set by the Indian Ministry of Finance for the compulsory selection of returns for complete scrutiny duri...
Income Tax : CBDT hereby authorises the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax/Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (NaFAC) having her / his headqua...
Income Tax : The three formats of notice(s) are: Limited Scrutiny (Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection}, Complete Scrutiny (Computer Aided Scruti...
Income Tax : Central Board of Direct Taxes, with approval of the Revenue Secretary, has decided to modify notice under section 143(2) of the In...
Income Tax : Instruction No.1/2015 Clarification regarding applicability of section 143(1D) of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Vide Finance Act, 2012...
Delhi ITAT held that donations qualifying under Section 80G do not lose eligibility merely because they form part of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) expenditure.
The Court held that, for assessment year 2009-10, filing the audit report along with the return was directory and not mandatory. Deduction under Section 80IA could not be denied when the report was furnished during assessment proceedings.
The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of a ₹10 lakh deduction after the recipient political party informed the tax authorities that it had not received the contribution. The ruling emphasises that taxpayers must establish the genuineness of donations claimed under Section 80GGC.
The ITAT Pune held that a genuine claim for exemption under Section 10(20) cannot be rejected merely because the assessee mistakenly claimed a deduction under a different provision in its return.
The Mumbai ITAT held that Section 263 cannot be invoked merely because the Assessing Officer accepted income without making an addition after conducting enquiries. The ruling clarifies that revisionary powers require a lack of enquiry, not just a difference of opinion over the adequacy of verification.
The Tribunal held that the MAT provisions under Section 115JB do not apply to banking companies, following binding precedents in the bank’s own cases. The decision provides significant relief by confirming that banks are not liable to tax on book profits under MAT provisions.
The ITAT observed that invoking the test of human probabilities cannot replace factual verification of books and bank records. Additions under Section 69A require evidence showing that the disclosed cash was unavailable.
The ITAT found that provisions for identified legal and professional expenses represented crystallized liabilities requiring TDS deduction. The key takeaway is that only genuine contingent liabilities may escape such obligations.
The Hyderabad ITAT observed that if a property is treated as stock-in-trade, the applicability of Section 43CA cannot be ignored. The ruling clarifies that deeming provisions under Section 50C and Section 43CA operate in different contexts.
The Tribunal quashed the reassessment after finding that the Assessing Officer failed to issue notice under Section 143(2). The decision confirms that compliance with this statutory requirement is indispensable in reassessment proceedings.
