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...
ITAT Delhi held that deeming fiction of section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act cannot be attracted when loan or advances are made to person not being shareholder. Accordingly, CIT(A) rightly deleted the addition and hence appeal filed by revenue dismissed.
ITAT Delhi held that deduction under section 54F of the Income Tax Act allowable since the provisions of section 54F allows for construction of the property within a period of three years. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
The ITAT Pune has set aside an income tax addition of Rs. 41 Lakh in demonetized notes for Dashrath Kisanrao, remanding the case to the AO for fresh verification of bank deposit certificates.
TAT Ahmedabad rules income from recorded sales, already taxed, cannot be re-added as unexplained cash credit for Dipakkumar Vyas, citing double taxation.
Karnataka High Court upholds quashing of reassessment order against Hewlett Packard Financial Services, citing non-disposal of assessee’s objections as a mandatory procedural breach.
ITAT Bangalore held that expansion of scope of limited scrutiny without obtaining required prior approval as directed under CBDT Order No. F.No.225/402/2018/ITA.II dated 28.11.2018 is bad-in-law and hence order of AO is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Jaipur held that newly inserted Explanation 2(a) to Sec. 263 does not give unfettered powers to Commissioner to revise each order. Held that revisionary proceeding u/s. 263 not justified as order not erroneous or prejudicial to interest of revenue.
Income received by an electricity distribution company from staff loans and advances should be classified as business income under Section 28(i) and not as “income from other sources”.
ITAT Chennai held that reopening of assessment u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act on mere change of opinion without satisfying necessary ingredients for initiating reassessment is invalid and liable to be quashed. Accordingly, reassessment set aside.
By returning the loan, the assessee has only utilised the loan for the purpose of business and repaid the same. Merely because some operator has managed the affairs and all the transactions cannot be labelled as non-genuine.
