Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai invalidates reassessment against Shah Rukh Khan for FY 2012-13, addressing foreign tax credit claims and procedural fl...
Income Tax : Learn about Income Tax Act Section 147 assessment proceedings: reasons for reopening, notice issuance, objections, assessment proc...
Income Tax : Budget 2025 revises block assessment rules for search cases, covering undisclosed income, assessment procedures, penalties, and ti...
Income Tax : Under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, reassessment cannot be based on a mere change of opinion by the AO. Read more on this leg...
Income Tax : SC clarifies reassessment notices under TOLA and Finance Act 2021 in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal. Learn how decision impacts t...
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 : ITAT Surat condones a 162-day delay in appeal filing by a 77-year-old farmer, citing lack of legal guidance, and directs a fresh a...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai rules that share transactions backed by DEMAT statements cannot be treated as bogus income without concrete proof....
Income Tax : ITAT Surat remands case to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on HUF gift taxability under Section 56(2)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, ci...
Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur rules that when search finds incriminating material, proceedings must be under Section 153C, not 147/148. Read case de...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court sets aside IT reassessment against Oxford University Press, ruling no failure to disclose material facts for reo...
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...
Corporate Law : Income Tax Gazetted Officers’ Association (W.B.) Unit Date: 02.02.2023. To The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, W...
Allahabad High Court held that valid service of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is a condition precedent for making reassessment under section 147. Accordingly, non-service of notice on registered email ID is unsustainable in the eyes of law.
ITAT emphasized that the AO must decide on the objections raised by the assessee before proceeding with the assessment. Failure to do so renders the assessment bad in law.
In Vinayagam Sabarisanthanakrishnan Vs ACIT, Madras HC clarifies that failure to file returns under Sec 139(1) is essential for prosecution under Sec 276CC of the Income Tax Act.
Delhi High Court judgment in Sanjay Kumar Vs ACIT reveals flaws in reassessment proceedings, jurisdictional issues, and errors in income tax notice.
In the case of Aashish Luthra vs. ITO, ITAT Mumbai deletes cash deposit addition after establishing the source as property sale advance received by the father.
Bombay High Court held that reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, without any fresh and tangible material, merely on the basis of change of opinion is unsustainable in law.
The mere receipt of funds from M/s Solvent Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. did not constitute tangible evidence of income escapement by the assessee. Despite efforts by the assessee to provide explanations and evidence, the AO failed to conduct independent inquiries and relied solely on the information received.
Mumbai ITAT sets aside penalty under section 271B, citing previous penalty under section 271A for non-maintenance of accounts in Haresh Ghanshyamdas Makhija vs ITO case.
Discover Mumbai ITAT order on Capacite Infra Projects Ltd Vs DCIT, analyzing disallowance of non-genuine/Bogus purchases and its implications on tax assessment.
Delve into the case of Paramjit Singh Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi) regarding jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and its impact on reassessment orders.
