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...
ITAT Chennai sustains 50% disallowance of claimed agricultural income (Padam Kumar Vs DCIT). Holds land ownership alone doesn’t prove cultivation; evidence is necessary.
ITAT Chennai quashes assessment because the notice u/s 143(2) was issued by a non-jurisdictional AO after jurisdiction transfer u/s 127 was effective. Jurisdictional error is fatal; entire assessment declared void ab initio.
Dakshina Kannada Sanathana Dharma Sangha vs ITO: High Court applies the Ramakrishna Seva Ashrama test, directing the AO to verify oral intent for corpus contributions.
Delhi High Court rules ITSC applications filed until March 31, 2021, are valid and must be treated as pending. Retrospective cut-off of February 1, 2021, is arbitrary, violating Article 14.
ITAT Mumbai set aside a cryptic CIT(A) order and remanded the entire case to the AO, directing a de novo inquiry into unexplained fixed deposits, cash, and flat investment after admitting new bank certificates and considering natural justice principles.
Issuance of a valid notice under section 143(2) was mandatory and non-issuance or belated issuance vitiated the assessment. Accordingly, Tribunal quashed the reassessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B as being void ab initio.
Reassessment order passed under Section 147/143(3) was quashed on the ground that no notice under Section 143(2) was issued after the assessee filed the return in response to notice under Section 148, rendering the assessment void ab initio.
ITAT Chennai held that interest received on enhanced compensation forms part of the compensation and hence entitled for exemption under section 10(37) of the Income Tax Act and accordingly, not taxable. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee allowed.
Delhi ITAT quashes the assessment for AY 2017-18, ruling that the AO who framed the order lacked jurisdiction because the mandatory Section 143(2) notice was issued by a different, non-jurisdictional authority. Defect is fatal and incurable.
Delhi ITAT confirms that an AO cannot disallow purchases of Rs.3.82 Cr as bogus (Adventure Resorts And Cruises Pvt. Ltd.) without rejecting the books of accounts under Section 145.
