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 : Tribunal held that allegations relating to client code modification did not justify adding the entire purchase value under Section...
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 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...
Each aspect of Section 147 has been a subject matter of careful scrutiny by the court of law. One such main issue is with respect to the validity of the assumption of jurisdiction by the AO to reopen the assessment beyond four years, merely by making a Bald Assertion in the reasons as to the failure of the Assessee to disclose fully and truly all the material facts. The author has made an analysis veracity of such practice with the help of available judicial pronouncements
The issue under consideration is whether CIT(A) is correct in holding that the appellant is not a state under Article 289 of the Constitution of India and therefore, liable to tax under the Income Tax Act?
Whether AO is correct in rejecting the claim of assessee regarding the deduction u/s 54F, which was made first time during Reassessment Proceedings?
The issue under consideration is whether A.O. is correct in issuing Notice under section 147 for re-opening of assessment irrespective of the fact that the material on which he relied is already present in front of him at the time of assessment u/s 143(3)?
AO was not justified in reopening of assessment after four years as on an independent application of mind and on thorough consideration of material aspects and legal position,there was no failure on the part of assessee.
DCIT Vs Coal India Ltd (ITAT Kolkata) Section 148 of the Act does not authorize the AO to issue fresh notice when proceedings on a previous notice u/s. 148 of the Act are still pending and have not been finally disposed of. Similar view was taken by the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Commercial Art […]
ITAT states that the assessee has disclosed the sale of shares in its books of account. Once the sale is declared as income by the assessee, the question of treating the same amount as a cash credit u/s 68 of the Act results in double addition. Thus, the addition is also bad on merits. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
The issue under consideration is whether CIT(A) is correct by annulling the assessment order on the ground that no notice under section 143(2) was issued before the completion of assessment?
T. Krishnamurthy Vs ITO (Madras High Court) This is a case where details of investment in shares and immovable property were not originally disclosed by the petitioner at the time of filing of the original returns under section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the respective assessment years. Therefore, two notices under section 148 […]
Bimla Devi D/o. Shri Phool Chand Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The issue under consideration is whether the ex-parte order passed by CIT(A) without discussing merit of the case is justified in law? ITAT studied the matter and state that it is pertinent to note that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order and dismissed the appeal […]
