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...
ITAT Ahmedabad held that assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Hence, revisionary jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act not justifiable as twin pre-conditions not satisfied.
Bombay High Court held that exercising extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India not justified as alternate and efficacious remedy already available with the petitioner. Hence, writ petition dismissed.
In pursuance of search, notice u/s.153A was issued and in response, assessee also filed its return of income. AO noted that assessee had taken loan from four parties during the years under consideration.
Assessee had strongly contended that he was unaware of who Shri Kaustubh Latke and Shri Shailesh Patil are, since they were not connected with him or Rucha Group.
ITAT Bangalore held that denial of exemptions under section 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act is unjustified as fees are charged by town planning authority to ensure accountability and fund public welfare initiatives, not to generate profit.
ITAT Hyderabad held that no records brought suggesting that assessee has contrived losses by using Client Code Modification. Thus, disallowance of losses only on presumption is not justifiable. Accordingly, disallowance deleted.
Gujarat High Court held that in the absence of new material facts brought on record by the Revenue reopening of assessment beyond the period of 4 years is found to be not sustainable in the eye of law. Thus, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Revision order issued by PCIT was quashed against Make My Trip (India) Private Limited as AO had conducted a proper inquiry before allowing the deduction of Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP) expenses.
ITAT Visakhapatnam ruled no penalty for voluntary income disclosure post-survey, rejecting AO’s concealment claims.
ITAT Jaipur held that the assessee has sufficient amount of interest free fund to make investment yielding exempt income, therefore, disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act not justified. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
