Income Tax : ITAT held that additions based solely on third-party search material without independent evidence or cross-examination are invalid...
Income Tax : A detailed look at how the Finance Act, 2021 reshaped Sections 147–151, introduced Section 148A, and reduced limitation periods ...
Income Tax : The Finance Bill, 2026 clarifies who can issue notices under sections 148 and 148A. It confirms that only jurisdictional Assessing...
Goods and Services Tax : The court held that once late fee is imposed for delayed annual return filing, a further general penalty is not permissible. Secti...
Income Tax : The issue was whether an assessment could be reopened after four years. The Court held that full disclosure by the taxpayer barred...
Income Tax : Learn about the new block assessment provisions for cases involving searches under section 132 and requisitions under section 132A...
Income Tax : Discover how Finance Act 2021 revamped assessment and reassessment procedures under Income-tax Act, impacting notices, time limits...
Income Tax : Income Tax Gazetted Officers’ Association requested CBDT to issue Clarification in respect of the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme...
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 issue was deletion of additions on unsecured loans treated as unexplained cash credits. The tribunal upheld deletion, holding ...
Income Tax : The issue involved dismissal of appeal due to delay and non-appearance. The tribunal condoned the delay citing medical reasons and...
Income Tax : The issue was whether reassessment could be initiated after four years without fresh evidence. The court held such reopening inval...
Income Tax : The issue was whether reassessment notice issued without approval from the correct authority is valid. The tribunal held it invali...
Income Tax : The Court held that reassessment proceedings must be initiated within the statutory time limit. It found the notice issued after t...
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...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 29/2024-Central Excise rescinds six 2022 excise notifications in the public interest, effective immediately. Deta...
Income Tax : Learn how to initiate proceedings under section 147 of the IT Act in e-Verification cases. Detailed instructions for Assessing Off...
Income Tax : Explore e-Verification Instruction No. 2 of 2024 from the Directorate of Income Tax (Systems). Detailed guidelines for AOs under I...
Income Tax : Supreme Court in the matter of Shri Ashish Agarwal, several representations were received asking for time-barring date of such cas...
Karnataka High Court quashed several notices, assessment orders, and bank garnishments issued under sections 148A, 147, 156, and 226(3), allowing the cooperative federation’s petition.
ITAT Mumbai condoned 75-day delay in filing appeal, recognizing assessee’s illiteracy and reliance on tax consultant, allowing fresh adjudication on merits.
AO treated ₹13 lakh cash deposits as unexplained, but ITAT found all deposits supported by cash book and bank self-cheques. Entire addition under section 68 was deleted.
ITAT held reassessment invalid where AO acted on belated return without issuing mandatory 143(2) notice. Entire reassessment under sections 144/147 was quashed despite late filing of return.
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)’s deletion of Rs. 11.26 crore LTCG, noting the unregistered JDA could not constitute a transfer under Section 2(47)(v). Taxability arises only upon registration and statutory approvals.
Tribunal found the appellate order non-speaking, failing to consider multiple submissions including 54F claims and compensation deductions. The matter is remanded for comprehensive review and proper opportunity of hearing.
CIT(A) wrongly rejected the assessee’s rectification petition under section 154 despite portal evidence. ITAT restored the appeal for fresh adjudication with full opportunity to submit evidence.
With all Section 68 additions deleted across the three years, the basis for penalties under Section 271(1)(c) disappeared. The Tribunal directed complete removal of penalties, highlighting that concealment cannot be presumed when additions themselves lack merit. The ruling reinforces the principle that penalty proceedings cannot survive defective assessments.
ITAT rules that an additional 54B claim omitted in the original return cannot be mechanically rejected. AO must examine the claim on merits, verifying capital gains utilisation and statutory conditions.
Tribunal invalidates reassessment where AO relied on incorrect data and PCIT granted mere Yes approval. Highlights importance of independent application of mind under Sections 147/148/151.
