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...
Read the full text of the judgment/order by the Kerala High Court in the case of Mini Muthoottu Credit India Vs CIT. Learn about the court’s ruling on the deductibility of interest on loans for purchasing agricultural land.
Read the full text of the ITAT Kolkata’s order in the case of Maa Biddeswari Agro Products Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO. Learn how the ITAT ruled to delete the addition of share premium due to the AO’s flawed valuation.
Read about the Madras High Court’s decision to quash an Income Tax assessment order issued while objections were pending before the Dispute Resolution Panel.
Analysis of Bharat Jaroli vs PCIT case by ITAT Indore, highlighting AO’s failure to scrutinize cash payments under Sec 40A. Detailed review and outcome provided.
ITAT Mumbai held that disallowance made u/s. 14A of the Income Tax Act read with rule 8D deleted as tax free funds were more than investment made on which exempt income was earned.
Read the full text of the ITAT Bangalore order on Aijaz Ahmed Suri Vs ITO regarding demonetization deposits. Analysis and conclusion included.
Mool Chand Aggarwal Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) CIT(A) cannot disbelieve cash book only on the ground that ‘generally individuals do not maintain cash book and it is not mandatory to maintain cash book for the individual’.
ITAT Delhi in Preeti Bhardwaj Vs ITO held that AO cannot treat cash deposits as unexplained when assessee has provided the source of cash deposits being cash withdrawals without bringing adverse material.
The case pertained to the disallowance of interest amounting to Rs. 1,16,82,953/- paid on an unsecured loan. This ruling sheds light on the meticulous examination of evidence and the importance of substantiating claims in tax matters.
Reassessment proceedings on the ground that assessee was one of the beneficiary of Client Code Modification (CCM) by some broker was quashed as there was no material to infer that such client code modification had been done with the malafide purpose of shifting the profit or evasion of the tax.
