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...
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that motor vehicles deployed to Central Deposit Yard Premises are not subject to Motor Vehicle Tax and are entitled to get exemption as contemplated in Motor Vehicles Act.
Gujarat High Court held that if the company has ceased to exist as a result of the approved scheme of amalgamation then in that case, the jurisdictional notice issued in its name would be fundamentally illegal and without jurisdiction.
Held that the petitioner is plying the vehicles in the Central Deposit Yard premises itself proves that the premises does not fall under the definition of ‘public place’ as under Section 2 sub Section (34) of the Act. Hence, motor vehicle tax not leviable.
ITAT Mumbai held that 100% addition in case of bogus purchases unsustainable. Notably, addition to the extent of rate of gross profit in case of bogus purchase is duly sustained.
ITAT Visakhapatnam held that the requirement of both the issuance and service of such notice upon the assessee for the purposes of Section 147 and 148 of the Act are mandatory jurisdictional requirements. Order passed is liable to be quashed on account of non-service of notice u/s 147/148.
ITAT Delhi held that statue doesn’t empower the Assessing Officer to withdraw or modify or substitute the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act with another assessment order.
Madras High Court rules in favor of Packirisamy Senthilkumar, ensuring fair tax process and correcting procedural errors under Section 148A(d).
In the case of Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. vs DCIT, the Bombay High Court examines the requirement of tangible material for reopening an assessment. This analysis explores the claim of deduction on payment made to settle a class action suit and the court’s decision
ITAT Mumbai held that addition u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as the assessee being non-resident, income has been invested in India and not arisen in India.
ITAT Ahmedabad confirmed addition on account of bogus long term capital gains from transaction in penny stock observing that mere filing documentary evidences did not discharge onus cast on the assessee to prove genuineness of the transaction.
