Income Tax : Learn about common income tax notices for salaried individuals, their implications, and steps to handle them effectively. Avoid le...
Income Tax : Supreme Court disallows ₹10 crore bad debt deduction for Khyati Realtors Pvt Ltd, ruling it as capital expenditure, not eligible...
Income Tax : Learn about rectifying mistakes in income tax orders under Section 154, including types of rectifiable orders, responsible authori...
Income Tax : Learn about the Faceless Income-Tax Proceedings, including e-Proceedings features, differences from manual assessments, and how to...
Income Tax : Understand the implications of receiving a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. Learn how to respond, time limits, a...
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 Ahmedabad held that CIT(A) rightly restricted disallowance on account of unexplained bank deposit and withdrawal under sectio...
Income Tax : Held that the invoices issued by the assessee contained a barcode. A barcode on a tax invoice serves as a verification mechanism, ...
Income Tax : Assessee then filed returns in response to the notice under Section 148, claiming a deduction under Section 80P. AO disallowed the...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held that reassessment proceeding u/s. 148 initiated against non-existing company is not sustainable in law in a...
Income Tax : ITAT Raipur held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act justifiable since no plausible explanation provided fo...
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 Chennai held that once the nature and source of credit found in the books of accounts is linked to business, then any income generated out of such business activity is assessable under the head income from business and profession alone, but not under the provisions of section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that any expenditure incurred for purpose of earning income chargeable under the head ‘income from other sources’ is allowable as deduction u/s. 57(iii) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that the Indian Subsidiary operating in an independent manner doesn’t constitute as a “Permanent Establishment” in India and hence income of the assessee is not allowable to be taxed in India.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act merely based on statement of the key person which was retracted subsequently unsustainable as genuineness, identity and creditworthiness proved.
In this article, we discuss ITAT Mumbai’s decision in Hiranandani Healthcare Pvt Ltd vs CIT case regarding set-off of brought forward losses and impact of Section 79 on individual shareholding changes.
ITAT Kolkata held that the assessee has no permanent establishment in India and these services were also rendered outside India but the services has been used in India and, therefore, it is taxable in India.
ITAT Mumbai held that entire assessment order passed in the case of non-existing entity is null and void and hence is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Mumbai held that Broadcasting Reproduction Right is not covered under the definition of Royalty under the Income Tax Act as well as Article 12 of the India-USA DTAA.
In a significant decision, ITAT Mumbai rules in favor of D.C. Polyester Ltd., stating that penalties under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act cannot be imposed for incorrect income head treatment.
Analysis of ACIT Vs Karsan Bhai Khimabhai Patel case where AO’s lack of independent inquiry invalidated unexplained investment addition. Learn more about ruling.
