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 upheld deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) where interest income was earned from deposits with a co-operative bank. It held that a co-operative bank remains a co-operative society for this purpose.
The issue was whether an Assessing Officer can travel beyond limited scrutiny without mandatory approval. The Tribunal held that such action violates binding CBDT Instructions and renders the assessment void from inception
ITAT Mumbai ruled that ancillary software support services did not constitute FTS under the India–Singapore DTAA, deleting a ₹482.77 crore addition due to failure of the make available test.
ITAT Bangalore ruled that interest earned on deposits from cooperative banks by credit societies is attributable to their business of lending and qualifies for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i).
ITAT Chennai remanded a case involving Rs. 11.26 lakh cash gifts back to the CIT(A), allowing the NRI assessee another opportunity to substantiate the claim with supporting documents.
ITAT Pune held that a claim of agricultural income cannot be accepted without supporting records. Complete non-compliance at all stages justified treating the receipts as unexplained income.
ITAT Hyderabad held that an unsigned sale agreement cannot automatically justify higher capital-gains additions. The AO must verify actual receipt of funds before confirming any addition.
ITAT Bangalore condoned a 247-day delay in filing appeals caused by email miscommunication and change of accountants. The Tribunal restored Section 80P(2)(a)(i) deductions for cooperative society interest income.
Bombay High Court held that this court order doesn’t contain any ‘finding’ or ‘direction’ as contemplated by provisions of section 153(6) and consequently no order of assessment could be passed in view of bar of limitation in section 153(1) of the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal held that past cash withdrawals cannot justify demonetisation deposits without evidence of continued cash holding. The is that unexplained deposits attract section 69A.
