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...
ITAT Delhi affirmed direction of CIT(A) to take average of prices reported in Kingsman Publication report and New York Board of Trade [NYBOT] price after converting FOB as per Comparable Uncontrolled Price [CUP] for purpose of computing ALP on issue of import sugar.
The Tribunal considered whether RTGS credits constituted unexplained money. It ruled that once sale bills, customer ledgers, and bank entries align, Section 69A has no application.
Emphasising settled law, the Tribunal ruled that properly documented loan transactions cannot be rejected without cogent contrary material. The CIT(A)s deletion of additions was therefore affirmed.
The Tribunal examined suspicion surrounding a large cash advance for property. It ruled that suspicion alone cannot replace evidence, and once the transaction is substantiated, section 68 addition must be deleted.
The Tribunal held that a final assessment passed without giving effect to binding DRP directions violates section 144C. Such an order is void ab initio and cannot be sustained once the statutory time limit has expired.
The Tribunal examined whether Section 153A could be applied to the search year itself. It held that invoking Section 153A for the wrong assessment year was invalid, rendering the assessment void.
The addition on shares contributed to a family trust was deleted as the trust was exclusively for the benefit of relatives. Section 56(2)(x) does not apply where the statutory exemption conditions are satisfied.
The Tribunal held that where reassessment is based solely on search material found during a third-party search, proceedings must be initiated under section 153C. Reopening under section 147 was held to be without jurisdiction and quashed.
The tribunal held that assessments selected for limited scrutiny cannot include additions on unrelated issues without formal conversion to complete scrutiny. All such additions were set aside as being without jurisdiction.
The case examined the tax treatment of purchases from alleged accommodation entry providers. The Tribunal held that at best, only the profit element embedded in such purchases can be brought to tax.
