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...
Delhi High Court held that initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as impugned notice issued in the name of dead person.
ITAT Delhi held that cess fees received by the board is income derived from property held under trust and is thus taxable and the same cannot be treated as capital receipt.
Reassessment order was quashed on cash deposits as AO did not possess any credible information to form a belief that income had escaped assessment and there was non-application of mind for reopening the matter.
ITAT Mumbai held that adoption of value of land as determined by the Stamp Duty Authority without referring the valuation to Valuation Officer u/s. 50C of the Income Tax Act unjustified. Accordingly, matter restored for de novo adjudication.
Assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A) with a delay of about 133 days in filing the appeal. However, CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by not condoning the delay and without adjudicating the issues on merits. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Madras High Court held that Settlement Commission not authorized to rectify the order under section 154 of the Income Tax Act as power of rectification vested to Settlement Commission only with effect from 01.06.2011.
ITAT Ahmedabad rules that Section 50C applies to sellers, not buyers, and clarifies the retrospective effect of Section 56(2)(vii)(b) on property transactions.
ITAT Kolkata quashes DCIT’s reassessment of Ganesh Steel for AY 2012-13 due to jurisdictional errors and invalid addition of bogus purchases under Section 69C.
ITAT Chennai held that failure to issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Income Tax Act after issuing notice u/s. 147 and prior to finalizing the re-assessment vitiated the entire proceedings. Accordingly, order quashed.
Delhi High Court held that reinitiating of reassessment action u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act on the same set of reasons on which assessment proceedings had already been concluded is unjustified and hence liable to be set aside.
