Income Tax : Learn how different types of income tax assessments are conducted under the Income-tax Act. The FAQs explain assessment procedures...
Income Tax : This guide explains who is required to maintain books of account under Section 44AA based on business, profession, turnover, and i...
Income Tax : This guide explains the various assessments under the Income-tax Act, including summary assessment, scrutiny assessment, best judg...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that an addition under Section 69A cannot be sustained when the assessee is denied the opportunity to cross-exami...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that CIT(A) cannot enhance income under Section 251 on matters not considered by the Assessing Officer during as...
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 ITAT held that reassessment notices issued after the surviving limitation period prescribed by the Supreme Court were invalid....
Income Tax : The Gujarat High Court held that reassessment cannot be sustained merely because of high-value bank transactions without evidence ...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that an addition under Section 68 cannot be sustained solely on information received from the Investigation Wi...
Income Tax : The ITAT Hyderabad held that the entire sale consideration could not be assessed as short-term capital gains without examining the...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid because the notice under Section 148 was approved by the Principal C...
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...
During the pendency of assessment proceedings assessee died and notice u/s. 142(1) dated 12.03.2022 has been issued to legal heir/representative of the assessee as per provisions u/s. 159.
Madhya Pradesh High Court reviews the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act in the Susheel Kumar Shankarlal case.
In response to the notice under Section 263, assessee argued that the issue had already been examined during reassessment proceedings and that the AO had taken a plausible legal view.
In the event and income sourced in India was not characterized under the heads provided in the DTAA, the income would be taxable under the residual clause provided taxing right was allocated to source country in this case to India under the relevant DTAA.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that revisionary proceeding under section 263 of the Income Tax Act quashed since enquiry already conducted by AO during the course of assessment proceedings. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
The notice u/s. 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued to the assessee, along with the notice reasons recorded for reopening assessment were also supplied to the assessee.
ITAT Delhi held that order passed u/s. 148A(d) is non-speaking since AO failed to provide adequate counter explanation against reasons furnished by the assessee. Accordingly, assessment u/s. 147 non-est and void ab initio.
Bombay High Court held that reopening of assessment u/s. 147 in absence of any fresh material, based on material already available during assessment proceedings, tantamount to mere change of opinion and the same is not permissible in law.
Held that there was substantive correspondence between the petitioner and the Assessing Officer on all materials and subject matter of reopening and all such materials had formed part of the disclosure by the petitioner.
AO had made the addition with the observation that no response was received from assessee. Based on that, he proceeded to complete the assessment u/s 144 based on the information available on his record.
