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...
Calcutta High Court stays notice under Section 148 of IT Act issued by Jurisdictional AO for AY 2017-18, citing jurisdictional issues. Awaiting exchange of affidavits.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assails the Assessment Order dated 27 March, 2024 passed by Respondent No.2 under the provisions of Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
ITAT Indore held that rejection of appeal by CIT(A) on the footing of non-payment of advance tax as required by section 249(4)(b) untenable as payment of advance tax is not applicable in case of reassessment proceedings.
Telangana High Court held that notice issued u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act must comply with the requirement of the Scheme whether or not the Taxpayer is NRI/Indian Citizen. Thus, issuance of notice to NRI u/s. 148 without following mandatory faceless procedure is set aside.
Bombay High Court held that issuance of notice under section 148A of the Income Tax Act by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and not by a Faceless Assessing Officer as required by the provisions of section 151A of the Income Tax Act is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Kolkata held that CIT has not applied his mind analytically while assuming jurisdiction for taking cognizance under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. Thus, in absence of independent application of mind, invocation of revisionary provisions by CIT unsustainable.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that passing of revisionary order by PCIT u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act without giving proper and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee is liable to be set aside.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that order of PCIT invoking section 263 of the Income Tax Act set aside as conditions necessary for invoking Section 263 of the Act, i.e., the order being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, are not satisfied.
Associated Chambers of Commerce And Industry of India Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. (Delhi High Court) Delhi High Court held that action of reassessment merely on the allegation of delayed digital filing of Form 10 without based on the formation of an opinion that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Facts- […]
Madras High Court held that personal hearing through video conferencing or other mode was not provided inspite of specific request. Hence, order passed without satisfying mandatory requirement of section 144B of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable in law.
