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 held that suspicion, abnormal price rise, or third-party reports are insufficient to deny LTCG exemption. Revenue must establish direct involvement of the taxpayer in price rigging.
The issue was whether a penalty can survive when the notice does not specify the exact charge. The Tribunal held that a vague notice vitiates the entire penalty proceedings, even where AMT liability exists.
The issue was whether personal capital could be compared with partnership capital to infer unexplained credits. The Tribunal held the comparison flawed and upheld deletion of the Section 68 addition.
The Tribunal ruled that penalty under Section 270A cannot stand where income is enhanced purely by estimation. Additions made by applying a higher profit rate, without incriminating material, fall outside under-reporting.
The issue was whether DRP cases escape the outer limitation under section 153. The Tribunal held that section 153 continues to apply and quashed the assessment as time-barred.
The issue was whether an assessment is valid when notice under Section 143(2) is issued by an officer lacking pecuniary jurisdiction. The Tribunal held such notice invalid and quashed the assessment as void ab initio.
Once the cash credit addition failed, the special tax under Section 115BBE could not survive. The Tribunal deleted the entire addition, reaffirming that consequential provisions fall with the primary addition.
The issue was whether retaining both limbs of Section 271(1)(c) in the notice renders the penalty void. The Tribunal ruled that failure to strike off the inapplicable limb vitiates the proceedings. Penalties must be founded on precise allegations.
This case involved reassessment completed without serving the mandatory scrutiny notice. The Tribunal ruled that such omission is not a curable defect and invalidates the proceedings. The decision reinforces strict adherence to statutory safeguards.
It was ruled that deciding appeals based on facts of another year is a serious legal error. The matter was sent back for reconsideration on correct facts.
