Income Tax : ITAT held that a return filed under section 148 remains valid even if delayed. Failure to issue mandatory notice under section 143...
Income Tax : Tribunal held that an assessment is void when the competent officer does not issue the mandatory notice. Jurisdiction cannot arise...
Income Tax : A surge in Section 143(2) notices was triggered by the June 2025 limitation deadline. This explains why cases were picked and how ...
Income Tax : Automated risk alerts are delaying income-tax refunds without clear reasons. The law allows withholding only through statutory pro...
Income Tax : Faceless Income-tax proceedings and e-assessments under Section 144B simplify taxpayer compliance. Use the e-filing portal for ele...
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 : Delhi ITAT held that Dividend Distribution Tax paid on dividends to non-resident shareholders could be restricted to the treaty ra...
Income Tax : The Hyderabad ITAT held that purchases cannot be treated as bogus merely because the supplier failed to respond to a notice under ...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that the assessee was covered under the search proceedings even though its name did not specifically appear in the...
Income Tax : Court ruled that reassessment notices under Section 148 must be issued through the faceless mechanism under Section 151A and the 2...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that addition of Rs. 13 lakh under Section 69A through rectification proceedings exceeded the scope of Section...
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...
The ITAT Delhi has restored an appeal by Mehinder Sharma, previously dismissed by the NFAC for non-compliance, granting a final opportunity to present his case.
ITAT Rajkot held that appellate authorities have power to entertain fresh claim and accordingly, claim of erroneously addition to computation of income accepted and direction given to AO to determine taxable income of assessee afresh.
ITAT Delhi following the decision of Delhi HC in assessee’s own case held that profit earned on sale/redemption of investment is not chargeable to tax. Accordingly, appeal allowed to that extent.
It is settled proposition of law that CBDT circulars are binding on department and it has to be strictly followed by officers of department. AO cannot be permitted to travel beyond the issues for which case was selected for limited scrutiny without taking mandatory permission from concerned PCIT or Pr.CCIT.
ITAT Rajkot held that imposition of penalty u/s. 271B of the Income Tax Act for not getting books of accounts audited cannot be sustained since assessee has filed return u/s. 44AD and there is no need to maintain books of accounts u/s. 44AD.
ITAT Bangalore upholds the deletion of a Section 56 addition. The sale of jewellery inherited through a will constitutes a long-term capital gain, allowing the assessee to claim a Section 54F deduction.
ITAT Bangalore upholds a Section 263 revision. An AO’s assessment order that silently accepts cash deposits and property sources, without proper inquiry, is erroneous.
ITAT Delhi: Addition on expensive watches deleted. The court held they belonged to the entire Kochar family, and possession was consistent with their status.
Assessee had recorded the cash deposits as sales in the audited books of account, and no discrepancies were found by AO or CIT(A). Failure to provide PAN alone could not be the sole reason to treat the sales as unexplained money, particularly when Aadhaar details were submitted.
The ITAT Cuttack ruled that additions cannot be made for completed assessments without incriminating material found during a search, upholding the principle from the Abhisar Buildwell case.
