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...
The Tribunal ruled that a Section 148 notice issued after six years from AY 2013–14 was invalid, quashing the reassessment and additions under Section 54F.
ITAT Chennai ruled that an assessment order issued without a Document Identification Number violates CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 and is invalid. Tribunal held that non-compliance with circular’s mandate cannot be cured by later communication of DIN. Orders lacking DIN are deemed never to have been issued.
The Supreme Court held that revision under Section 263 requires both error and prejudice to revenue. In this case, depreciation claimed by a loss-making entity was tax-neutral, so revision was invalid.
The Telangana High Court ruled that an assessment order passed ten years after an ITAT remand violated Section 153 of the Income Tax Act. It held that the order was barred by limitation and unsustainable in law. The Court directed refund of taxes with interest, subject to the outcome of the pending departmental appeal.
The Tribunal ruled that grants from the Maharashtra Government for road projects were capital in nature. Such promoter’s contributions cannot be taxed as business income.
ITAT Mumbai held that expenses on dies and moulds used in vehicle manufacturing are revenue in nature, not capital, as they involve regular replacements without creating new assets. The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)’s view, citing consistency with past rulings.
ITAT Mumbai ruled that once the Assessing Officer is aware of a merger, assessment in the name of the amalgamating company is invalid and without jurisdiction.
ITAT Delhi held that Transfer Pricing Adjustment made by the revenue on account of administrative support services segment deserves to be deleted since services rendered are in nature of intra group services and not stewardship activity.
The ITAT Bangalore held that income from tissue culture and nursery operations forms part of agricultural income under Section 10(1) when integrated with land-based cultivation.
ITAT Indore held that Proviso to section 12A(2) was very much available for AY 2018-19. Thus, the assessee is eligible to exemption u/s 11/12 on the basis of Proviso to section 12A(2). Accordingly, appeal is allowed.
