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 : Where unaccounted sales were established through seized material, only the net profit embedded therein was liable to tax, and not ...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that additions made in an intimation under Section 143(1) cannot be disputed in an appeal against a scrutiny a...
Income Tax : Interest on delayed payment of the FM radio migration fee was a compensatory business expenditure deductible under Section 37(1); ...
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 : 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...
In Peter Vaz vs CIT, Bombay HC rules ITAT erred in barring Sec 153C challenge & refusing delay condonation. Cites Rule 27, Balakrishnan (SC). Matter remanded.
Gujarat High Court held that re-opening of assessment solely relying upon information made available on the insight portal, without forming any independent opinion, is unsustainable in law and hence liable to be quashed.
ITAT Jaipur held that reasons recorded for selecting case for scrutiny never mentioned that case was selected for limited scrutiny hence approval for conversion not required. Matter remanded to CIT(A) to decide case based on merits.
Accordingly, the A.O vide his order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act, dated 26.12.2018, after making the aforesaid addition determined the income of the assessee firm at Rs.20,98,730/-.
ITAT Raipur held that vacating addition/ disallowances by CIT(A) based on additional documentary evidences filed before him without confronting AO is against the provisions of rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Thus, matter restored back to AO.
ITAT Mumbai held that assessee is permitted to set off unabsorbed depreciation pertaining to AY 1997-98 to 2001-02 against short term capital gains. Accordingly, AO is directed to delete the addition and appeal of the assessee is allowed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that addition on the basis of loose papers and documents found from the premises of third party is not tenable in the eye of law. Accordingly, appeal of the revenue is dismissed since addition not based on substantial evidence.
Bombay High Court held that order passed without granting an opportunity of being heard is passed against the principles of natural justice and accordingly, is liable to be quashed. Thus, petition is allowed and orders are quashed.
Orissa HC upholds faceless assessment, ruling that notice sequence under Sections 142(1) & 143(2) is immaterial. Petition dismissed; appeal option open.
Gauhati High Court held that addition merely on the basis of retracted statement without any other relied upon evidence/ material is not sustainable since retracted statement cannot be termed as incriminating material. Hence, appeal of revenue dismissed.
