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 Jaipur held that there was short gap between three notices issued as say the opportunities granted hence it a fit case were one more opportunity should be granted in the proceedings before CIT(A), to enable the assessee to represent his appeals.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act not justifiable as AO had examined the issue in the course of assessment proceeding.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that assessment order passed by AO without conducting adequate inquiry is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue and hence revisionary proceeding under section 263 rightly invoked by PCIT.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that initiation of proceedings u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act based on material found during search of another company is untenable as proceedings should be initiated u/s. 153C and not u/s. 147.
Madras HC rules Settlement Commission orders can’t be rectified under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, upholding the principles from Brij Lal case.
Bombay High Court held that initiation of reopening of assessment after expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year without failure on part of the petitioner to disclose any material fact fully and truly is unsustainable in law.
ITAT Mumbai held that normal period of limitation i.e. 3 years will apply in case of reopening of assessment where escapement of income was below Rs. 50 Lakhs and extended period of 10 years will apply only in case of concealment of income of Rs. 50 Lakhs or more.
Re-opening of assessment by AO was unjustified if the original return had not been processed by following the decision in case of Super Spinning Mills Ltd. vs Addl. CIT 37 DTR (Chennai) (T.M) (Trib).
ITAT Delhi remands case to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication due to lack of physical notice before ex-parte decision on unexplained investment.
However, the completed/unabated assessments could be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under sections 147/148, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 and those powers were saved.
