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...
ITAT confirmed that ownership of additional properties under construction does not block Section 54F deduction if they are business assets. Deduction on LTCG invested in residential property was upheld.
ITAT Delhi held that a loan used to repay a bank cannot be treated as a trading liability under section 41(1). Since no deduction was claimed earlier and no write-back occurred, the addition of ₹8.22 crore was rightly deleted.
ITAT Delhi held that Section 69C cannot be invoked when purchases are recorded in books, paid through banking channels, and sources are explained. Estimated profit addition of 12.5% was deleted.
The Tribunal held that reassessment based only on the Shah Commission report, without independent material or application of mind, is invalid. Reopening beyond four years after full disclosure was quashed, nullifying additions and penalties.
ITAT Delhi ruled that annual revenue-linked DTH licence fees are revenue expenses under Section 37, not capital under Section 35ABB, allowing full deduction for the assessee.
The issue concerned an upward transfer pricing adjustment on corporate guarantee fees charged to AEs. The Tribunal upheld the fee at 0.25% as arm’s length, citing prior ITAT precedents. The takeaway: valid comparable data and indemnification protect against such adjustments.
The Tribunal held that revenue-sharing license fees under the 1999 policy are capital expenditure, mandatorily amortizable under section 35ABB, following the Supreme Court verdict.
Tribunal confirmed that transfer of passive infrastructure assets is genuine and qualifies as a gift under section 47(iii), rejecting revenue’s claim of tax avoidance.
Transfer pricing adjustment of ₹21.88 lakh partly reduced to 0.5% corporate guarantee fee. Tribunal confirms international transaction status but applies consistent methodology with prior years.
Lenders had confirmed loans in response to statutory notices, yet additions were made. The Tribunal upheld deletion by CIT(A), stressing the importance of uncontroverted confirmations. The ruling reinforces evidentiary discipline in Section 68 cases.
