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 addition towards section 68 of the Income Tax Act deleted as assessee discharged initial onus by proving identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
In the assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2001-02, the Coordinate Bench had upheld the CIT(A)’s decision to allow 40% of the damages under Section 14B of the Act as compensatory while treating the balance 60% as penal in nature and disallowing the same.
ITAT Chennai held that only profit embedded to creditors written off and discount receipts is needed to be added since both i.e. creditors written off and discount receipts are inextricably linked with business of assessee. Hence, appeal partly allowed.
Bombay High Court upholds reassessment in a tax case, citing new evidence of undisclosed income and unverified transactions, allowing further challenges in appeal.
ITAT Chennai sets aside ex-parte CIT(A) order on ₹33 lakh cash deposit, citing natural justice and Section 250(6) violations. Case remanded for fresh adjudication.
ITAT Kolkata rules that no additions can be made in completed assessments under section 153A without incriminating material seized during the search.
In the abovementioned matter ITAT remanded the matter to AO after observing that assessee failed to apply under rule 46 A (Additional Evidence) of the IT Rules.
ITAT Kolkata upholds CIT(A)’s decision to delete ₹3.92 crore additions under Section 41(1), ruling no cessation of liabilities in AY 2014–15 for Shreekrishan Goswami.
Assesse being a partnership firm, engaged in the business as dealer in petroleum products who filed its return at Rs.3,00,950/-. Subsequently the case was selected for limited scrutiny.
ITAT Kolkata held that CIT(A) rightly deleted addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act since identity and creditworthiness of share purchased duly explained. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
