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...
ITAT Raipur held that entire addition of transaction in the hands of assessee under section 69 of the Income Tax Act as unexplained investment not tenable since the same needs to be allocated between joint beneficial owners. Thus, matter restore back to file of AO.
ITAT Delhi held that re-assessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act initiated due to change of opinion without having any fresh material on record is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Delhi High Court held that reassessment order is liable to be set aside as it was based on information that was fully examined in the earlier round of reassessment u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, appeal allowed and order set aside.
ITAT Pune ruled that Rs. 1.02 crore in short-term capital gains was wrongly added to the taxpayer’s income, as it was already taxed under her husband’s return.
ITAT Pune remands case after CIT(A) upholds TDS-related additions due to lack of proper hearing, directing reconsideration with adequate opportunity for the assessee.
ITAT Kolkata rules on Islampur C.S. Shop 2 vs ITO, addressing cash deposits during demonetization and Section 69A addition. Read the tribunal’s key findings.
Penalty imposed under section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with a notice during the Covid-19 pandemic was deleted due to disruptions caused by lockdowns during outbreak of Covid-19 Pandemic and the Supreme Court’s extension of limitation periods.
Since CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal without addressing key issues raised against the assessment order, therefore, the matter was remanded back to CIT(A) as CIT(A) should have examined this issue by reviewing the assessment records.
ITAT Raipur dismisses appeal against ₹81.44 lakh addition for alleged bogus purchases due to a 125-day delay without a condonation request.
ITAT Rajkot condones 147-day delay in tax appeal due to wife’s illness. Case remanded to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
