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 Delhi held that reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act on the basis of stale information results into change of opinion and the same is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, appeal is allowed and reopening is quashed.
ITAT Mumbai held that transfer pricing adjustment in relation to international transaction of payment of bareboat charter hire fees is directed to be deleted since benchmarking approach of assessee is already accepted by DRP in earlier years.
Delhi High Court held that order is liable to be set aside and matter remanded to ITAT since ITAT failed to provide appropriate reasoning with regard to functionality of comparable while undertaking transfer pricing adjustment.
Delhi High Court held that addition of unsecured loans under section 68 of the Income Tax Act rightly deleted since the said amount is already disclosed before Income Tax Settlement Commission. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
The Tribunal reduced unexplained cash deposit addition from Rs.11.59 lakh to Rs.2.59 lakh, noting both the taxpayer and the department failed to fully substantiate their claims during the demonetization scrutiny.
Tribunal confirmed that incomplete construction does not cancel a transfer under section 2(47)(vi). The matter was remanded for proper computation of capital gains considering partial project completion.
The Tribunal confirmed that employees’ contributions to EPF and ESIC deposited after the statutory due dates are disallowable under Section 36(1)(va). The assessee’s appeal was dismissed as the delay was not condonable.
Delhi ITAT held that AYs 2010–11 and 2011–12 fell outside the limitation for Section 153C and found no valid incriminating material for later years, setting aside all related assessments.
ITAT upheld reopening of assessment but allowed Section 54 exemption, ruling that construction delay due to YEIDA’s possession issues was beyond assessee’s control and thus eligible for relief.
ITAT held that the Assessing Officer made a ₹50 lakh addition solely on estimation without any supporting material, and deleted the addition as no evidence linked the assessee to alleged bogus share transactions.
