Income Tax : Learn how different types of income tax assessments are conducted under the Income-tax Act. The FAQs explain assessment procedures...
Income Tax : Section 145(3) allows rejection of books if accounts are unreliable or standards are not followed. The key takeaway is that specif...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that cash deposits cannot be treated as unexplained income unless books of account are formally rejected under s...
Income Tax : Summary of statutory deadlines for issuing income tax notices (Sec 143, 147) and completing assessments, reassessments, and appeal...
Income Tax : Understand the three core processes of Indian Income Tax: Rectification of mistakes (Sec 154), the four types of Assessment (Summa...
Income Tax : Starting October 1, 2024, Commissioners (Appeals) will gain new powers to set aside and refer best judgment assessments back to As...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid because the notice under Section 148 was approved by the Principal C...
Income Tax : ITAT held that interest earned by a co-operative credit society from deposits with a co-operative bank remained attributable to it...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court held that rejection of a Vivad se Vishwas declaration was invalid because final assessment arose from survey pr...
Income Tax : The High Court set aside the assessment order, demand notice, and bank attachment after finding that the proceedings were complete...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that the Assessing Officer failed to produce any material establishing a connection between the assessee and the all...
Income Tax : ITAT Chandigarh held that ITO Ward-3(1), Chandigarh had no jurisdiction to issue notice to an NRI and hence consequently the asses...
ITAT Mumbai deleted ₹20,000 yearly penalties where assessments under section 153C accepted returned income with no additions, holding notice non-compliance as merely technical.
The Tribunal considered whether RTGS credits constituted unexplained money. It ruled that once sale bills, customer ledgers, and bank entries align, Section 69A has no application.
The Tribunal held that a final assessment passed without giving effect to binding DRP directions violates section 144C. Such an order is void ab initio and cannot be sustained once the statutory time limit has expired.
The Tribunal deleted both substantive and protective additions made across multiple years on the same alleged receipts. It held that such duplication results in impermissible multiple taxation of identical amounts.
The High Court held that reassessment proceedings initiated by a jurisdictional Assessing Officer were without authority after introduction of the faceless scheme. All notices, assessment orders, and demands were set aside on jurisdictional grounds.
The appeal was dismissed solely on procedural grounds without hearing the assessee. The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) is duty-bound to decide appeals on merits after granting a proper opportunity.
The Tribunal held that serving notices on an outdated email ID violates principles of natural justice. The assessment was set aside and the matter restored for fresh adjudication after proper service.
The Tribunal ruled that cash deposits arising from regulated liquor sales are a normal business incident. Where bank reconciliations explain the source, Section 69A cannot be invoked.
The Tribunal held that interest earned by a co-operative society from investments with co-operative banks falls within Section 80P(2)(d). Such income is deductible, subject to verification of the source and bifurcation.
Cash deposits followed by regular transfers to the telecom operator established a clear business cycle. The ruling confirms that explained business receipts cannot be treated as unexplained cash.
