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 Mumbai held that depreciation on the business/commercial rights arising from the manufacturing contracts, supply contracts and maintenance contracts as claimed by the assessee is allowable. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that addition towards bogus purchases based on supporting documentary evidence, without carrying out necessary verification from GST department, cannot be sustained. Accordingly, matter restored back to file of AO for re-adjudication.
The issue was regarding the disallowance of depreciation and expenses on retention money. Assessee had purchase contracts with retention money payable after successful performance of machinery and recorded the liability under the mercantile system.
ITAT Hyderabad held that rejection of books during assessment proceedings does not retrospectively nullify the obligation to comply with section 44AB of the Income Tax Act within the prescribed time. Accordingly, penalty under section 271B upheld.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Jodhpur has set aside an order that led to the double taxation of income, instructing the tax authorities to correct a taxpayer’s inadvertent error. The ruling distinguishes a key judicial precedent to prevent an unjust outcome.
ITAT Chandigarh rules advance receivables qualify as application of income u/s 11(2), deleting Rs.56,947 shortfall and directing AO to accept claim.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai has provided relief to Axis Finance Limited by ruling that club membership and subscription fees paid for employees are a valid business expense under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act.
The ITAT Delhi deletes a ₹17.95 lakh tax addition on royalty expenses for Travel Food Services, applying the principle of consistency from previous years’ decisions.
A procedural error by the First Appellate Authority leads the ITAT Ahmedabad to send an unexplained investment case back to the Assessing Officer The court directs the AO to properly investigate the source of funds for a property purchase.
ITAT Delhi held that non-resident company assessee was not having any control over employees seconded by it to Indian entity and hence there cannot be any fixed place Permanent Establishment [PE] of the assessee in India. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
