Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that disallowance of agricultural expenses based on estimation is unsustainable without concrete evidence, rul...
Income Tax : Understand the implications of receiving a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. Learn how to respond, time limits, a...
Income Tax : Article discusses about Order which can be rectified under section 154 of Income Tax Act, 1961, Rectification of Income Tax order ...
Income Tax : Explore the implications of taxation under section 115BBE, including misuse of sections 68 to 69D, consequences of high tax rates,...
Income Tax : Every taxpayer has to furnish the details of his income to the Income-tax Department. These details are to be furnished by filing ...
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 : Delhi HC held that the settlement consideration as received was liable to be recognized as capital gains and the same couldn’t p...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that genuineness of transaction, creditworthiness and identity of creditors not proved, hence addition u/s. 68...
Income Tax : Karnataka High Court held that settlement commission, accepting additional income offered as reasonable and giving immunity from p...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune restored the assessment order as assessee neither filed any evidence nor provided material in an attempt to discharge th...
Income Tax : Rajasthan HC upholds penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for unexplained cash deposits after withdrawals. ...
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 reopening of assessment u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act after four years without any tangible material amounts to change of opinion and according the same is invalid and liable to be quashed.
Explore the intricacies of ACIT Vs Satish Kumar Keshri, a pivotal case by the Patna High Court about the application of Section 153A in Income Tax assessments. Learn about the court’s stand and its implications.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that payment of cash towards purchase of land exceeding the prescribed limit is duly disallowed under section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that on execution of agreement when the possession was also handed over, the transfer within the meaning of section 2(47)(v) and (vi) was complete and accordingly capital gain provisions gets applicable.
ITAT Mumbai held that in case of company is involved in providing illicit LTCG/ short term capital loss (accommodation entries), a substantial addition has to be made in the hands of beneficiaries and only a protective assessment can be made in the hands of company providing such accommodation entries.
Jharkhand High Court held that once penalty order is set aside, it will be presumed that there is no concealment and hence prosecution under Section 276C(1) of the Income Tax Act will be quashed automatically.
ITAT Delhi held that attribution of profit from offshore supply and services to the Permanent Establishment unsustainable as assessee didn’t have any Permanent Establishment in India in the assessment years under dispute.
Assessing Officer’s claims on the irregularity of additional salary payments are unfounded, says ITAT. When payments are made via cheque and duly recorded, there’s no reason to treat them as ‘outside the books.’ The assessee provided evidence that these are year-end calculations, not fictitious transactions. The additional salaries are legitimate and shouldn’t be interpolated for 12 months.
ITAT Delhi held that as there is no copyright on live events, the license fees for live and non-live transmission right cannot be taxed as royaty in terms of section 9(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, addition deleted.
Bombay High Court held that reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as the assessee has fully and truly disclosed all the material facts.
