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 Chennai has remanded the case of Dr. Anbu Selvan vs. ITO, involving Rs. 50.5 lakh in unexplained money, back to the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal cited the AO’s failure to specify transaction details, allowing for fresh consideration.
ITAT Nagpur has partly allowed a taxpayer’s claim for indexed cost of improvement on a property, scaling down disallowance after finding some renovation expenses plausible.
ITAT Kolkata directs CIT(A) to issue a speaking order on merits, setting aside an ex parte dismissal in an income tax appeal.
The Gujarat High Court invalidated a tax reopening notice against Hemanshu Ramniklal Shah, ruling it was based on a “change of opinion” rather than new material, after the original assessment was already scrutinized.
ITAT Mumbai held that it is the duty imposed on the Assessing Officer to complete the rectification process within six months. Thus, by remanding the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer, it is directed to complete the rectification within one month.
ITAT Allahabad held that renting out of property on day-to-day basis and providing certain facilities to those who would be taking premises on rent seems to be an organized activity of composite nature. Hence, income from the same is treated as business income.
Delhi High Court held that where notice is sent electronically, the date of dispatch of e-mail is to be considered as date of issue of notice and date of digital signature is irrelevant. Accordingly, petition dismissed.
As stated earlier, appellant had raised objection on 15.01.2022 against re-opening but the same was not disposed of by AO by passing a speaking order as per guidelines issued by SC in case of KGN Driveshafts.
ITAT Hyderabad held that disallowance by invoking provisions of section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act not sustained since the sum is not an advance/loan to sister concern, however, it is an investment.
ITAT Mumbai held that as per section 70(2) the short-term capital loss can be set off against gain from any other capital asset. Thus, set off of short-term capital loss (on which STT was paid) against the short-term capital gains (on which STT was not paid) is allowed.
