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 Bangalore held that expansion of scope of limited scrutiny without obtaining required prior approval as directed under CBDT Order No. F.No.225/402/2018/ITA.II dated 28.11.2018 is bad-in-law and hence order of AO is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Chennai remands Murugan Doraisamy’s case, allowing re-evaluation of Section 54F deduction despite a delay in Capital Gains Account deposit.
Delhi High Court held that concluded and closed assessments cannot be reopened merely on suspicion. Accordingly, reopening of assessment is liable to be quashed since there is no tangible material that has a live nexus to reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment.
ITAT Mumbai held that in the present case there is a surrender of tenancy rights against which a new flat has been allotted. Thus, deduction u/s. 54F admissible against the capital gain so computed on surrender of tenancy right.
Income received by an electricity distribution company from staff loans and advances should be classified as business income under Section 28(i) and not as “income from other sources”.
Madras High Court held that reopening of assessment beyond the period of limitation prescribed under section 149(1)(a) and (b) of the Income Tax Act is without jurisdiction. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed and proceedings set aside.
ITAT Chennai held that reopening of assessment u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act on mere change of opinion without satisfying necessary ingredients for initiating reassessment is invalid and liable to be quashed. Accordingly, reassessment set aside.
The Petitioner prayed for a direction upon the respondents not to proceed further on the basis of the notice u/s. 148 of the Act of 1961 and drop the proceedings after considering the objection dated 21.02.2022. Petitioner also prayed for an interim stay of the impugned notice.
Since the notice was issued under Section 148 in the name of a non-existing entity, despite the department having been intimated about the amalgamation much earlier, the impugned notice under Section 148 was null and void. Consequently, the reassessment order passed based on this invalid notice was quashed.
Assessee then filed an appeal before Tribunal. It was held that assessee had included net gain of ₹17.02 crore from foreign currency transactions and translations in its operating income, but DRP had rejected the claim.
