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 Tribunal noted that the assessment proceedings were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and the assessee could not respond to certain notices. The case was restored for reconsideration after giving adequate opportunity.
The ITAT held that provision for dealer incentives under a sales promotion scheme was based on a scientific method and not a contingent liability. The disallowance made by the tax authorities was therefore deleted.
The Tribunal held that reassessment notices issued under Section 148 in the name of a company that had already amalgamated are invalid. The reassessment orders were quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
ITAT Delhi held that payments made by an employees’ welfare society to members, including death claims and retirement benefits, must be set off against taxable interest income before computing taxable income.
The Tribunal held that failure to electronically file Form 10 as required under Section 11(2) can lead to denial of income accumulation benefits. The case was remanded to allow the assessee to seek condonation under CBDT guidelines.
The tribunal examined whether an appeal could be dismissed for non-compliance without considering the assessee’s explanation. It set aside the order and remanded the matter, directing the authority to decide the appeal afresh after granting a proper hearing.
The Delhi High Court upheld the ITAT s ruling that assessment orders were invalid because the approving authority granted Section 153D approval mechanically without examining the records.
ITAT Delhi held that gift of a property to wife specially when she is a co-sharer in the property cannot be considered to be a colourable device and camouflage transaction to taint claim of Section 54F of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, deduction u/s. 54F erroneously disallowed.
The Tribunal held that reopening an assessment after four years is invalid when the assessee has fully disclosed all material facts during the original scrutiny. The reassessment was quashed for lack of new material evidence.
The issue was whether the entire bank deposits could be treated as unexplained income under Section 69. The tribunal held that deposits linked to business activity cannot be fully taxed and directed estimation of profit at 8%.
