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 Pune held that reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act based on audit objection is merely change of opinion and the same is impermissible in law. Accordingly, notice issued u/s. 148 is not valid and is liable to be quashed.
The Tribunal held that additions based on presumptions without evidence cannot be sustained fully. It reduced the addition on unexplained cash deposits from 10% to 5%, granting relief to the assessee.
The Tribunal held that exemption cannot be denied merely because the purchase agreement was unregistered. Substantial payment and possession were considered sufficient for claiming relief.
The Tribunal held that different floors of the same building constitute one residential house. Deduction under Section 54 cannot be denied on the ground of structural division.
The article explains remedies available after adverse tax orders under scrutiny and reassessment. The key takeaway is that choosing the right remedy depends on identifying the exact defect in the order.
The issue was penalty for misreporting on sale of land classified as capital asset. The Tribunal held the issue was debatable and deleted the penalty.
The dispute involved incorrect invocation of valuation provisions by the AO. The Tribunal ruled that using Section 142A instead of 55A vitiated the assessment.
The dispute involved unexplained cash deposits in bank accounts. The Tribunal ruled that deposits partly belonged to the principal, reducing the addition.
The issue was whether addition can be made only on survey admission. The Tribunal held that without corroborative evidence, such addition is unsustainable.
The issue involved cash deposits during demonetization treated as unexplained. The Tribunal held that deposits backed by recorded sales cannot be taxed under Section 68.
