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...
The Tribunal held that an assessment order passed after the assessee’s death, without impleading legal heirs, is a nullity in law. The matter was remanded for fresh assessment in accordance with section 159
The Tribunal held that when interest-free funds exceed exempt-income investments, no interest disallowance under Section 14A can be made. The ruling reinforces the presumption laid down by the Supreme Court.
The issue was whether an assessment can continue after the assessee’s death. The Tribunal held such an order void ab initio when the legal heir is not substituted.
The issue was whether reassessment could proceed without disposing of objections to recorded reasons. The Court held that failure to decide objections vitiates the entire reassessment.
The assessee challenged a large section 14A disallowance on procedural and factual grounds. The Tribunal upheld satisfaction but ordered recomputation after excluding mutual fund investments.
The appeal was dismissed ex-parte due to alleged non-compliance by the assessee. The ITAT found that notices were issued to the wrong email despite correct details on record and ordered de novo consideration.
The dispute involved whether the Varanasi Bench could adjudicate an appeal arising from a Kolkata-based assessment. The Tribunal held that filing before an incorrect Bench is fatal and parties must approach the jurisdictional Tribunal.
The AO denied exemption relying on an inspector’s report citing minimal construction. The Tribunal held that documentary evidence showed a habitable residence, entitling exemption.
The AO accepted documents but still made an addition without pointing out defects. The Tribunal ruled that section 68 requires adverse findings, not assumptions.
The dispute concerned the head of taxation for interest received on enhanced land compensation. The Tribunal ruled that Section 28 interest is an accretion to compensation and cannot be assessed as income from other sources.
