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 Raipur held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act justifiable since no plausible explanation provided fo...
Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur held that issuance of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act by ACIT, Jaipur, is illegal and liable to be quas...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata held that reopening of assessment framed u/s. 148A(d) without application of mind and without controverting the expla...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court held that reopening of an assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of communication...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 69 towards unexplained cash made by the AO without bringing any concrete evidence on ...
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 Jaipur held that addition towards unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act merely based on retracted statement cannot be sustained. Accordingly, appeal of the revenue dismissed.
Assessee was entitled for exemption under section 10(10B) for Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) compensation on whole of the amount received citing that the Central-Government approved schemes that benefited Employees.
ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69 towards unexplained investment merely based on loose sheets without any corroborative evidences is unsustainable in law. Also held that addition on the basis of mere assumption and presumption not sustainable.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that non-compliance to notices issued u/s. 250 by CIT(A) resulted into delayed appellate proceedings. Accordingly, cost of Rs. 5,000 imposed on the assessee for lack of diligence.
ITAT Agra held that addition towards interest paid on CC is liable to be deleted since interest free advance given to potato growers (farmers) were out of the business expediency. Accordingly, addition deleted and appeal allowed.
ITAT Agra held that ex-parte dismissal of appeal, as notices issued by CIT(A) were not compiled, without adjudicating issues on merits is in violation of section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. Hence, order set aside and matter remitted back to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
ITAT Ahmedabad rules technical glitches caused a one-day delay in PF/ESIC credit, deleting the disallowance under Section 36(1)(va) for AY 2018-19.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition towards unexplained cash deposits not justified as CIT(A) has partly accepted the cash book and partly rejected the cash book without assigning any reason. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
In the abovementioned matter ITAT remanded the matter to AO after observing that assessee failed to apply under rule 46 A (Additional Evidence) of the IT Rules.
Assesse being a partnership firm, engaged in the business as dealer in petroleum products who filed its return at Rs.3,00,950/-. Subsequently the case was selected for limited scrutiny.
