Income Tax : Learn the updated provisions governing rectification, assessments, reassessments, and appeals under the Income-tax Act. This guide...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that penalty under Section 270A cannot be levied merely because income was estimated after rejection of books. Si...
Income Tax : The Income Tax Department explains how faceless assessments under Section 144B operate through the e-Filing portal without requiri...
Income Tax : The guide explains faceless assessments, appeals, penalties, rectification requests, and demand responses under the Income-tax Act...
Income Tax : Courts have held that non-compliance with mandatory procedures under Section 144B renders faceless assessment orders void. The rul...
Income Tax : In view of Indiscriminate notices by income Tax Department without allowing reasonable time it is requested to Finance Ministry an...
Income Tax : Lucknow CA Tax Practicioners Association has made a Representation to FM for Extension of Time Limit for Assessment cases time bar...
Income Tax : The Kerala High Court, today admitted a batch of Writ Petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Faceless Assessment...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai remanded the case to examine whether Section 56(2)(x) applied based on the agreement date and to consider refund of ex...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai deleted a Section 69 addition after finding documentary evidence established joint ownership, source of funds, and ear...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata condoned appeal delay, set aside the CIT(A)'s order, and remanded the assessment for fresh adjudication after grantin...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai quashed a Section 148 notice issued after the limitation under the first proviso to Section 149, holding the reassessm...
Income Tax : The High Court held that an assessment order passed without issuing a show cause notice detailing the proposed additions violated ...
Income Tax : CBDT issues guidelines for IT verification under Section 144B(5), detailing circumstances for digital and physical checks, effecti...
Income Tax : In pursuance of sub-section (3) of section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby makes the fo...
Income Tax : Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Assessment Unit (AU), Verification Unit (VU), Technical Unit (TU) and Review Unit (RU) unde...
Income Tax : Roll out of first phase of changes in ITBA functionalities for Faceless Assessment due to amendments in Section 144B by Finance Ac...
Income Tax : National Faceless Penalty Centre, in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Board, may,–– (a) in a case where imposit...
The ITAT Delhi held that the upload date of DRP directions on the ITBA portal must be considered for computing limitation under Section 144C(13). Since the final assessment order was passed beyond the prescribed period, the assessment was quashed as time-barred.
The issue involved estimation of income based solely on bank credits without supporting verification. The Tribunal remanded the case, directing assessment based on GST and VAT turnover.
The Tribunal held that lack of inquiry into a large receipt justified revision under Section 263. It found the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The ruling reinforces duty of proper verification.
The Tribunal held that absence of a clear charge in the penalty notice makes the proceedings invalid. It ruled that failure to specify the exact limb of misreporting renders the penalty unsustainable.
The issue was whether reassessment notice issued without approval from the correct authority is valid. The tribunal held it invalid and quashed the assessment for lack of jurisdiction.
The Tribunal held that since the Assessing Officer made no addition after verifying disclosures, the grievance lacked merit. Grounds were rightly treated as infructuous due to absence of tax impact.
The Tribunal held that trading and service activities were inextricably linked and could not be segmented. It accepted entity-level TNMM, rendering TP adjustments unsustainable.
The Tribunal held that commission paid to foreign agents for services rendered outside India is not taxable in India. Consequently, no TDS obligation arises, and disallowance under section 40(a)(i) was deleted.
The Tribunal held that FTC claims cannot be rejected solely due to incomplete foreign tax return filing. The key takeaway is that authorities must verify available and subsequent evidence before denying relief.
The tribunal held that cash deposits backed by sales records cannot be treated as unexplained income. It upheld deletion of addition where transactions were properly documented.
