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...
Bombay High Court held that since issue already examined during the course of assessment proceedings, re-opening of assessment on same issue amounts to change of opinion. Thus, re-opening based on change of opinion is not sustainable.
ITAT Delhi held that denial of exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act for delay in filing of Form 10B is not justifiable since condition of filing Form 10B is directory in nature and not mandatory. Accordingly, appeal allowed and exemption granted.
ITAT Raipur restored the matter to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as intimation of fixation of hearing was sent via email, and no physical/ hard copy was sent, inspite of specifically stating in Form 35 that all notices/ communication to be sent in a mode otherwise through email.
ITAT Delhi held that no addition in respect of share premium under section 68 of the Income Tax Act since necessary evidence along with valuation certificate as per rule 11UA(2)(b) of the Income Tax Rules already furnished. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
ITAT Jaipur held that expenditure towards supply of food packets for employees which was subjected to GST shall not be considered as contract and hence provisions of section 194C shall not apply.
Rational connection postulates that there must be a direct nexus or live link between the material coming to the notice of the Income Tax Officer and his view that there has been escapement of income of the assessee from assessment in the particular year.
Karnataka High Court held that assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Income Tax Act untenable since mandatory requirement of section 149(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act not complied. Accordingly, writ petition allowed and notice u/s. 148 quashed.
Bombay High Court held that reopening of the assessment would be permissible without there being any new or additional material available to the Assessing Office. Accordingly, reassessment notice is set aside and writ petition is allowed.
ITAT Raipur held that reopening of proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act beyond a period of 4 years without failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully & truly all the material facts is liable to be annulled.
Karnataka High Court held that reassessment order under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is bad-in-law since passed without following mandatory procedure of disposal of objections. Accordingly, order of reassessment set aside.
