Income Tax : Learn about common income tax notices for salaried individuals, their implications, and steps to handle them effectively. Avoid le...
Income Tax : Supreme Court disallows ₹10 crore bad debt deduction for Khyati Realtors Pvt Ltd, ruling it as capital expenditure, not eligible...
Income Tax : Learn about rectifying mistakes in income tax orders under Section 154, including types of rectifiable orders, responsible authori...
Income Tax : Learn about the Faceless Income-Tax Proceedings, including e-Proceedings features, differences from manual assessments, and how to...
Income Tax : Understand the implications of receiving a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. Learn how to respond, time limits, a...
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 : Bombay High Court held that reassessment proceeding u/s. 148 initiated against non-existing company is not sustainable in law in a...
Income Tax : ITAT Raipur held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act justifiable since no plausible explanation provided fo...
Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur held that issuance of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act by ACIT, Jaipur, is illegal and liable to be quas...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata held that reopening of assessment framed u/s. 148A(d) without application of mind and without controverting the expla...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court held that reopening of an assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of communication...
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 AO proceeded to treat the transactions as penny stock and relying on the investigation report on penny stock from the Investigation Wing, he disallowed the same u/s 68 of the Act to the extent of Rs.1,28,58,450/-.
ITAT Chandigarh held that reassessment order under section 147 of the Income Tax Act cannot be passed without compliance with mandatory requirement of notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. Thus, order passed u/s. 144 r/w 147 set aside.
Delhi High Court held that levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act without specifying the limb i.e. concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income not valid. Accordingly, penalty set aside.
ITAT Delhi held that CPC wrongly processed return by considering due date as 5th August instead of 31st October. Accordingly, interest charged under section 234A of the Income Tax Act deleted and interest charged under section 234B altered.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69 of the Income Tax Act on protective basis not justified since assessee established genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of entity from which share application money is received.
CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal and directed the AO to re-compute the “Income From Other Sources” after deducting the amount of Rs 24,25,426/-u/s 57(iii) of the Act. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Appellant has preferred the present appeal. The solitary issue that is raised is whether CIT(A) is justified in confirming the addition of Rs.35,13,000/- as unexplained money by invoking the provisions of section 69A of the Act.
ITAT Mumbai deleted additions made under section 43CA of the Income Tax Act by considering the stamp duty value on the date of registration of agreement as prescribed under section 43CA(3) of the Income Tax Act.
The assessee is an individual, engaged in the business as Kerosene dealers in Rajahmundry. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS “Limited Category” to verify the sources for “Cash deposits during demonetisation period”.
The assessee filed three appeals against order of CIT(A) for A.Y. 2010-11, 2012-13 and 2013-14. It is important to note that inspite of putting up the case of hearing several times, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee.
