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...
Co-operative society received/earned interest on deposits with the co-operative bank was eligible for claim of deduction under section 80(2)(d).
ITAT Hyderabad held that as the parties have entered into registered Joint Development Agreement (JDA) on 04.04.2007 and the “Group of assessee” have also handed over possession to the TBPD pursuant to the agreement. Hence, transfer took place in the assessment year 2008-09.
ITAT Mumbai held that receipt of Rs 37 crores of exempt capital gain in a non-descript listed company operated by the accommodation entry provider, who has confessed that he has provided accommodations entries to the beneficiaries, including assessee remanded back to the file of AO for further enquiry.
Madras High Court held that order passed without granting video conference hearing as sought by the petitioner is unsustainable as it is clearly violation of principles of natural justice.
ITAT Kolkata held that revisionary proceedings u/s. 263 initiated in the name of non-existent entity, despite the fact that private limited company was converted into LLP and the conversion was brought to the knowledge of AO, is void ab initio and invalid.
The Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) order passed without Document Identification Number (DIN) number should be treated as invalid and was contrary to the CBDT Circular No.19/2019 dated 14th August 2019 as it was clear in the body of DRP order, no DIN number was mentioned nor there was any reason of not mentioning the DIN number in order of the DRP.
Delhi High Court held that upward adjustment advertising, marketing and promotion expenses (AMP) rejected as reimbursement of AMP expenses incurred by respondent (Sony India) on behalf of its AE was at arm’s length.
ITAT Kolkata held that education cess is not allowable expenditure under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Hyderabad held that entire re-assessment proceeding is illegal and deserves to be quashed in absence of mandatory issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chandigarh held that initiation of reassessment proceeding merely on the fact that AO has not carried out independent enquiries of confirmations from the creditors, without pointing out any deficiency or inaccuracy, cannot be a base to hold that order was erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Accordingly, reassessment unsustainable.
