Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
Income Tax : Understand the statutory time limits for issuing income-tax notices and completing assessments under the Income-tax Act. The guide...
Income Tax : Learn the updated provisions governing rectification, assessments, reassessments, and appeals under the Income-tax Act. This guide...
Income Tax : Learn how different types of income tax assessments are conducted under the Income-tax Act. The FAQs explain assessment procedures...
Income Tax : Section 154 permits rectification of mistakes apparent from the record in assessment orders, intimations, and TDS/TCS processing s...
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 : ITAT Bangalore held that additions made in an intimation under Section 143(1) cannot be disputed in an appeal against a scrutiny a...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held legal services are not FTS under Section 9(1)(vii) and directed partner-wise DTAA examination. FTS addition was de...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai deleted a Section 69 addition after finding documentary evidence established joint ownership, source of funds, and ear...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai quashed reassessment after finding no Section 143(2) notice and that the AO issued a final order disguised as a draft ...
Income Tax : ITAT Surat held that delayed filing of Form 10B is a procedural lapse and remanded the matter after directing the AO to consider t...
Income Tax : Instruction No.1/2015 Clarification regarding applicability of section 143(1D) of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Vide Finance Act, 2012...
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.
ITAT held that no addition under Section 69A was justified when the jewellery found during search was less than the amount already declared in wealth tax returns. Revenue’s appeal was dismissed.
ITAT Mumbai held that consideration from a redevelopment agreement is taxable in hands of individual members, not co-operative housing society. Tribunal upheld CIT(A)’s deletion of ₹4.97 crore addition, confirming that society acted merely as a representative.
ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act rightly deleted by CIT(A) since cash deposit during demonetization duly reflected as cash sales and there was no abnormal spike in sales during demonetization.
