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 ITAT Chennai quashed additions under Section 68 against Arusuvai Food Processors, ruling that the provision only applies to fresh unexplained credits during the Assessment Year, not to genuine, consistently disclosed brought-forward trade payables.
A summary of ITAT Chennai’s order in Shanmugasundaram Venkatachalapathy Vs ITO, which sustained both unexplained investment under Section 69 and professional receipts found via Form 26AS but not declared in income tax return.
Telangana High Court held that income earned from production of hybrid seeds under supervision of company is in the nature of agricultural activity and income earned from such activity is exempt under section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
The ITAT Chennai, in the case of T. Radhakrishnan Vs ITO, ruled a ₹8 lakh cash deposit was from the sale of casuarina trees, not unexplained income, and deleted the tax addition.
ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that a Co-op Society cannot claim Section 80P(2)(d) deduction on interest from Regional Rural Bank deposits, as an RRB isn’t a co-operative society after 2010.
ITAT Delhi ruled that cash deposits during demonetization, already reflected in the assessee’s books, cannot be treated as unexplained income under Section 68. Entire Rs.53.51 lakh addition was deleted, ensuring no double taxation.
Bangalore ITAT set aside PCIT’s s.263 order, ruling that difference of opinion on profit estimation rate (6% vs 8%) for a contractor isn’t grounds for revision.
ITAT Delhi upholds the Rs. 1 crore addition (u/s 68) confirmed by CIT(A), dismissing the assessees appeal due to its repeated failure to produce evidence for the genuineness, identity, and creditworthiness of the purported loan. No evidence, no relief.
ITAT Delhi quashes Rs.8.16 crore addition on share capital and commission, emphasizing that mere suspicion without evidence cannot justify tax additions. Investor genuineness and banking records were upheld.
Delhi ITAT deleted a ₹30.65 lakh cash deposit addition made under Section 69A during demonetization. The source was proven to be a gift from the deceased grandmother’s savings of previously taxed rental income, preventing double taxation.
