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 Cochin dismisses co-operative bank’s appeal, affirming tax on unexplained cash credits under Section 68, stating they don’t automatically qualify for Section 80P deduction.
ITAT Raipur sets aside Rs. 10,000 penalty on Rishikesh Pandey for delayed document submission, citing reasonable cause and procedural errors.
Pune ITAT removes Rs. 22 lakh addition on G. N. Adgaonkar Jewels for cash purchases, citing flawed AO verification and consistent business practice. Delay also condoned.
Chandigarh ITAT remands DTC Trading Co. tax appeal for fresh hearing, citing advocate’s depression and memory loss as sufficient cause for ex-parte order.
Assessee claimed that cash sales were recorded and backed by VAT invoices, and that AO had misread e cash balance figures. Audited financials, VAT returns, and confirmations were placed on record, which AO had not examined.
ITAT Delhi held that addition towards earning fictitious profit by misusing Client Code Modification Facility merely on the basis of information received from Investigation wing without carrying out independent investigation is unsustainable in law. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Reassessment proceedings could not be sustained in respect of other issues raised in the audit except in respect of two specific expenditure heads: processing charges and professional fees as the same could be treated as “information” under Section 148A.
Gujarat High Court held that Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] to be followed under the Faceless Assessment Procedure of Section 144B of the Income Tax Act in case of non-responsive notice not followed. Accordingly, order quashed and matter remanded back to Faceless assessment authority.
ITAT Pune held that adjustment under section 11(3) of the Income Tax Act as deemed income cannot be sustained as accumulated surplus funds are utilized within stipulated time period and the amendment to the provisions of section 11(3) are held to be prospective in nature.
The addition of Rs.0.58 Crores as made for cash deposit in the account of IJF with respect to Maheshwari Brothers Coal also stand deleted on same logic. The corresponding grounds of appeal stand allowed.
