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 : 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 : ITAT Mumbai quashed reassessment after finding no Section 143(2) notice and that the AO issued a final order disguised as a draft ...
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 Tribunal ruled that pursuing a rectification remedy before filing an appeal constituted sufficient cause for delay. The CIT(A)s dismissal of the appeal on limitation was therefore set aside.
The Tribunal observed that CBDT instructions prohibit the AO from examining issues beyond the specific reason for limited scrutiny without proper approval. Additions relating to non-demonetisation cash deposits were therefore restricted.
The Delhi ITAT deleted addition made under Section 68 on alleged bogus purchases linked to accommodation entry providers. The Tribunal held that purchases and corresponding sales were already recorded in the books, leaving no basis for separate addition under Section 68.
The Tribunal noted that an adjustment under Section 35(1)(iv), already dropped during CPC processing, was later included in assessment computation without fresh notice to the assessee.
Mumbai ITAT held that disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) cannot be made where expenditure remains part of work-in-progress and is not claimed in the profit and loss account. The Tribunal upheld adjustment of WIP instead of direct addition to income.
The Kolkata ITAT held that reassessment proceedings were invalid where the reasons initially supplied related to a different company and the reopening was based on mechanical satisfaction. The Tribunal ruled that borrowed satisfaction without independent application of mind cannot justify reopening under Sections 147 and 148.
The Tribunal held that accounting treatment in the Profit and Loss Account does not determine taxability of a receipt. Principal loan waiver remained non-taxable despite being shown as extraordinary income in accounts.
The Bangalore ITAT held that mere differences between declared construction cost and DVO estimates cannot sustain additions under Section 69B without independent evidence of unaccounted investment. The Tribunal deleted additions relating to hostel construction expenditure.
The Bangalore ITAT held that uncorroborated WhatsApp chats and retracted statements are insufficient to sustain large on-money additions in search assessments. Additions based purely on estimates without incriminating evidence were deleted.
The Tribunal observed that once the Revenue accepted sales arising from the same goods, it could not entirely disallow purchases as bogus. The decision emphasized the importance of stock records, invoices, and transport documents.
