Income Tax : The article explains remedies available after adverse tax orders under scrutiny and reassessment. The key takeaway is that choosin...
Income Tax : The Court clarified that mere pendency of information exchange requests under DTAA cannot justify continuing a Look Out Circular. ...
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 : The Tribunal ruled that penalty under Section 271A cannot be levied merely because books were rejected and income was estimated. S...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that an assessment completed before receiving the DVO report under section 50C(2) is invalid. All additions and disa...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT allows Sanco Holding, a Norwegian company, to compute income from bareboat charter of seismic vessels under Article 21(...
Income Tax : It has been observed that in many cases an assessee may wish to make a claim which was not made in the return of income filed unde...
Income Tax : We have attached a file in excel format. The file contains the format of various details which normally assessing officer asks As...
Income Tax : Tribunal observed that the Assessing Officer failed to establish any mismatch in stock, sales, or accounting records before making...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that constituent members of a JV or Consortium can claim deduction under Section 80IA(4) when they actually ex...
Income Tax : The Tribunal found that full payment, TDS deduction, and transfer of possession established completion of the transaction for capi...
Income Tax : ITAT Rajkot held that cash deposits made during demonetization were fully supported by audited books of account, cash books, and b...
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 : Instruction No.1/2015 Clarification regarding applicability of section 143(1D) of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Vide Finance Act, 2012...
This case dealt with an addition confirmed without adequate opportunity of hearing. The Tribunal held that passing an order without considering filed replies is unsustainable, and directed a de novo assessment.
The issue was whether reassessment and LTCG addition could rest solely on INSIGHT portal information. The ITAT held that without independent enquiry or corroborative material, such inputs cannot sustain reopening or additions. The key takeaway is that suspicion can-not substitute evidence.
The Tribunal considered reliance on investigation wing inputs alleging non-genuine entities. It ruled that adverse material must be shared with the assessee and corroborated through proper enquiry before sustaining additions.
The Tribunal reaffirmed that revision cannot be exercised merely because the PCIT holds a different view. When the Assessing Officer’s view is plausible and based on enquiry, the assessment cannot be branded as erroneous or prejudicial.
The Tribunal examined whether an assessment ignoring a clear mismatch between turnover and TCS data could survive. It held that absence of enquiry on such discrepancy renders the order erroneous and prejudicial, justifying revision.
Despite granting several chances to appear and explain delays, the Tribunal found no genuine effort by the appellant. Discretionary relief like condonation will not be extended where conduct shows indifference.
Mumbai ITAT ruled that Section 145A is a valuation provision, not a charging mechanism, and deleted a ₹38.26 lakh MODVAT/CENVAT addition, highlighting that proper accounting and reconciliation prevent artificial income.
The Tribunal ruled that a co-operative bank continues to be a co-operative society for the purpose of Section 80P(2)(d). Deduction was therefore allowed on interest income wrongly disallowed at the CPC stage.
The Tribunal ruled that a creditor’s write-off alone cannot trigger section 41(1) taxation. The assessee’s liability persisted in its books, and the ₹10.23 crore addition was deleted.
The tribunal ruled rental income from administrative buildings must be taxed under house property, not other sources, emphasizing consistent treatment across years. Key deductions for standard, sub-letting, and interest were allowed.
