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...
The assessee neither filed returns nor responded to statutory notices, yet additions were deleted on appeal. ITAT held that absence of verification of source and compliance makes such deletion unsustainable.
The Revenue relied on alleged ₹4 crore unexplained investment to justify reopening beyond six years. The Tribunal ruled that even high-value allegations cannot override statutory limitation under section 153C.
Though some estimation was justified after rejection of books, a flat 1% rate was found arbitrary. The ITAT reduced the estimate to 0.50% aligned with prior years’ margins.
ITAT Surat struck down a 50% turnover-based income estimation, applying Section 44AD to compute actual presumptive profit at 8%. Key takeaway: AO cannot inflate income without legal basis.
The dispute centered on unexplained investment taxed in an incorrect year. The Tribunal ruled that such an addition is legally unsustainable and must be deleted.
The case involved a massive section 68 addition sustained solely due to non-admission of evidence under Rule 46A. The Tribunal held that procedural lapses cannot override substantive justice and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The issue was whether reassessment could survive when the mandatory section 148 no-tice was sent to an old address. The Tribunal held that improper service vitiates jurisdiction, rendering the entire reassessment void.
The Tribunal ruled that where more than three years have elapsed, sanction must come from the Principal Chief Commissioner. Approval by the Principal Commissioner renders the reassessment void ab initio.
he tribunal held that an appellate order based on an incorrect and reconstructed timeline of statutory notices is unsustainable. Errors in sequencing of notices strike at the root of jurisdiction and require fresh adjudication.
Applying a liberal approach, the tribunal condoned delay in appeal filing and examined the jurisdictional defect. Since reopening was initiated by the wrong authority, the assessment could not survive.
