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...
The AO added excise duty and sales tax to the total turnover while excluding lease rent and other incomes, categorizing them as “Income from Other Sources” rather than “Business Income”.
ITAT Pune held that penalty under section 271(1)(c)/ 271AAB of the Income Tax Act imposable even in case of voluntary disclosure or declaration or surrender per se of income. Accordingly, appeal filed by revenue allowed.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance of the opportunities granted to the assessee. Accordingly, cost of Rs. 10,000 imposed on the assessee and matter remanded back to CIT(A).
Delhi High Court held that Resale Price Method (RPM) is the most appropriate method when reseller imports goods from its Associated Enterprise (AE) and the goods are sold in the same condition without any value addition.
Allahabad High Court held that no substantial question of law arise since Tribunal after thorough scrutiny concluded that invocation of revisionary proceedings u/s. 263 by PCIT was without any base. Thus, appeal filed by revenue dismissed.
ITAT dismisses Revenue’s tax appeal due to jurisdiction issues, allowing the revenue to approach the appropriate bench for further action.
As a result, assessee was required to deduct TDS on payments made to Bemo. AO invoked Section 40(a)(i) for non-deduction of tax on Rs. 12,69,79,006, disallowing the deduction.
ITAT Mumbai held that the internal audit memo is outside the scope and ambit of the term “information” as provided in Explanation 1 to section 148 of the Act, prior to its amendment by the Finance Act, 2022. Accordingly, reopening of proceedings liable to be quashed.
It is settled law that the AO cannot supplant its view as to the commercial expediency of transactions in place of that of the Assessee. In the present case, the AO’s decision to disallow the loss is based on surmises and assumptions.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act rightly deleted as delay in BU was due to dispute of jurisdiction between AMC and AUDA. Accordingly, following judgement of Jurisdictional HC and SC disallowance rightly deleted.
