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 Delhi held that addition in case of bogus purchases is restricted to the extent of 25% of the purchases. As lower authorities made addition of 25% of bogus purchase, the same is sustainable.
ITAT Chennai held that reopening of assessment in absence of any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts necessary for the assessment and without any new tangible material is untenable in law.
ITAT Kolkata nullified addition due to late issuance of Notice under Section 143(2) of Income Tax Act. ITAT concluded that Notice was sent beyond specified deadline, making assessment void ab initio.
ITAT Bangalore held that the adjustment made by the TPO towards technical know-how fees despite accepting the entity level margins is liable to be deleted.
ITAT Indore held that addition on the standalone basis of statement of assessee u/s 132(4) of the Income Tax Act cannot be held as sustainable in absence of collaborative evidence found in support of such addition.
ITAT Chennai held that rejection of books of accounts justified as transactions recorded in the books of accounts are not properly vouched or supported by proper documents. Further, expenses and related vouchers were also not found in accordance with books of accounts.
ITAT Mumbai held that genuine TDS credit to Rinfra cannot be denied merely because credit of TDS didn’t reflected in Form 26AS as on account of transfer of business, Adani Electricity Mumbai Ltd. (AEML) transferred the income and TDS credit to Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. (Rinfra).
ITAT Raipur held that unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act was received back through banking channel in the form of sale consideration of the shares. Accordingly, the same has to be brought to tax u/s 115BBE of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Pune held that first and second proviso(es) to section 50C(1), inserted by the Finance Act 2016 w.e.f. 01.04.2017 being curative in nature inserted for removing hardships to the taxpayers and, therefore, it carries retrospective effect.
ITAT Hyderabad held that CIT(A) wrongly deleted the addition as nature of entries found in the cash book which were not recorded in the day book was not considered.
