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...
Bombay High Court held that initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment years without failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all the material facts unsustainable and liable to be quashed.
ITAT Delhi held that issuance of notice u/s 153C of the Income Tax beyond six Assessment Year immediately preceding the Assessment year from the date of recording of satisfaction note/ handling over of relevant material is not in accordance with law.
ITAT Mumbai held that penalty under section 271B of the Income Tax Act for delay in furnishing of audit report not leviable on account of reasonable cause shown that delay was due to the death of director who was also an accountant of the company.
CIT(A) resolved the appeal, considering the TDS credit issue, on 08/05/2019. Therefore, PCIT can’t invoke s.263 revision proceedings for the same issue, per Explanation-1(c) to section 263(1) of the Act.
ITAT Delhi held that income classified as ‘business income’ but not considered for the purpose of working of deduction u/s 80HHC merely on the nomenclature that income are not derived from export is unjustifiable as it is not justified that income has no nexus with earning of export.
ITAT Mumbai held that cancellation of registration of trust retrospectively from AY 2016-17 under section 12AB(4) of the Income Tax Act is invalid.
In present facts of the case, it was held that the services rendered were in the nature of advisory services as per the terms of the agreement, therefore these services cannot be the part of Fees for Technical Services (FTS) under Article 13 of India – UK DTAA.
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal while deducting the additions made by Ld. AO for repair and maintenance, it was observed that if the replacement is of a baby part only, then the same cannot be considered to be a capital expenditure.
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble High Court granted refund to the petitioner along with Interest from year 1988 for the cash which was seized without any corroboration and the said cash was also duly reflected in Income Tax Returns.
ITAT allowed internet expenses and labour charges as business expenses and further held that Section 115BBE not applicable to expenses adequately explained during assessment
