Income Tax : Courts have held that non-compliance with mandatory procedures under Section 144B renders faceless assessment orders void. The rul...
Income Tax : Budget 2026 introduces sweeping retrospective amendments affecting limitation, reassessment jurisdiction, DIN validity, and TPO ti...
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 : Overview of the Faceless Scheme for Income Tax: electronic assessments, appeals, penalties, and rectifications with no physical in...
Income Tax : Faceless Income-tax proceedings and e-assessments under Section 144B simplify taxpayer compliance. Use the e-filing portal for ele...
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 Indore held that appellate order violated principles of natural justice after finding that key hearing notices were sent to a...
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 : Tribunal noted the assessee’s contention that only his share in jointly owned properties could be taxed instead of the entire tr...
Income Tax : Tribunal held that deduction for bad debts is allowable in the year in which the debts are actually written off in the books of ac...
Income Tax : Court upheld the validity of the Section 148 notice but set aside the assessment order after finding that notices were sent to an ...
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...
Madras High Court grants GI.Retail Pvt. Ltd. two weeks to respond to a show-cause notice and orders personal hearing due to confusion over overlapping notices.
Delhi ITAT addresses an appeal dismissed due to amalgamation, emphasizing that an existing appeal can continue under the amalgamated entity.
Madras High Court sets aside an assessment order, granting a taxpayer opportunity to respond to notices after their authorized representative’s hospitalization for surgery.
Madras High Court orders tax re-assessment for teacher who claimed account misuse by bank manager, citing prior fraud case and denial of fair hearing.
ITAT Mumbai held that the cash deposited is out of the gross receipts and that once gross receipts are disputed then no addition is sustainable under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, appeal allowed to that extent and addition deleted.
ITAT Chennai imposes ₹10,000 cost on taxpayer for non-appearance, remands appeal on gold sale and gift additions to CIT(A) for fresh hearing.
Bombay High Court remands Dev Marketing’s tax assessment after Income Tax Department admits a bonafide error in denying a requested video conference hearing.
ITAT Kolkata dismisses Revenue appeal against Intime Vanijya Private Limited as tax effect on Section 68 addition falls below CBDT’s ₹60 lakh threshold.
ITAT Rajkot held that the reassessment notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act has been issued without obtaining the approval as prescribed under amended provision of section 151 of the Act is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
ITAT Kolkata held that CIT(A) accepted additional evidence and allowed the relief u/s. 10(26AAA) of the Income Tax Act without allowing an opportunity of being heard to AO. Therefore, the order of CIT(A) is in contravention of Rule 46A(3) of the I.T. Rules, 1962.
