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...
Gujarat High Court held that the proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act cannot be initiated to review the earlier stand adopted by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s. 148A(d) on the same ground which is already considered by AO cannot be sustained.
Mumbai ITAT has restored a bogus purchases case to the Assessing Officer for a fresh hearing, ruling that CIT(A) erred by partially restricting the addition without giving the assessee a full opportunity to present evidence.
Learn about the changes to income tax reopening proceedings under the Finance Act, 2021. This summary explains the new Section 148A and its relationship with Section 135A, highlighting key procedural points and common issues.
The ITAT Ahmedabad deleted a Rs.30.5 lakh addition, ruling the loan was genuine and supported by bank records, while upholding the reopening of the assessment.
Gujarat HC set aside an income tax reassessment order after the AO failed to consider the taxpayer’s detailed reply, emphasizing adherence to natural justice principles.
Briya Enterprise Ltd. successfully had delays in filing appeals condoned after ITAT held that notices sent to outdated email IDs and old Authorized Representatives justified the delay. Appeals were restored to CIT(A) for fresh decisions on merits.
Ramachandra Reddy Vs DCIT: The Karnataka High Court quashes reassessment notices issued by jurisdictional AOs, holding that after the March 29, 2022 notification, all such proceedings must be conducted via the mandatory faceless regime under Section 151A.
ITAT Chennai held that reassessment notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act without mandatory Document Identification Number [DIN] is invalid, non-est and hence liable to be quashed. Accordingly, assessment order thereon also collapses.
ITAT Delhi ruled that reassessment notices issued in July 2022 for AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17 were barred by limitation, citing a Supreme Court precedent.
The ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of Nilesh Shirish Mehta, setting aside a reassessment order for AY 2015-16. The tribunal found the Section 148 notice, issued after April 1, 2021, to be time-barred and invalid based on concessions made by the Department before the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal.
