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...
Accepting the assessee’s explanation for delay and non-appearance, the Tribunal condoned the delay and set aside both lower orders. The AO was directed to re-decide the issue of cash deposits after proper hearing.
The ITAT ruled that section 151 approval must strictly correspond to the recorded reasons for reopening. Any factual inconsistency reflects non-application of mind and collapses the reassessment at inception.
ITAT ruled that an allotment letter constitutes a valid agreement for section 56(2)(x) where consideration and binding terms are recorded. Stamp duty value on the allotment date, not the delayed registration date, must be applied.
The Tribunal ruled that section 263 cannot be invoked merely because no addition was made during reassessment. When the AO conducts proper enquiries and accepts the explanation, revision fails for lack of error and prejudice.
The Tribunal ruled that a statutory appellate authority cannot pass an ex-parte order after ignoring materials demonstrably available on record. The matter was restored for fresh consideration on all grounds.
The Tribunal reaffirmed that once expenditure is shown to be wholly and exclusively for business, section 37(1) disallowance cannot survive. Suspicion cannot override documentary and commercial reality.
The ITAT held that reassessment initiated in July 2022 for AY 2015-16 was barred by limitation. The ruling confirms that expired cases cannot be revived under the post-2021 reassessment framework.
ITAT found the recorded reasons vague and non-specific, failing to even identify the nature of alleged escapement. Such mechanical reasons render the notice under section 148 void ab initio.
ITAT ruled that disallowing full purchases while also taxing corresponding sales is legally unsustainable. A uniform 6% gross profit estimation on alleged non-genuine transactions was upheld as a fair and pragmatic approach.
The issue was whether reassessment could survive when sanction under section 151 was taken from the wrong authority. The Tribunal held that approval by the PCIT instead of the PCCIT/PDG is a fatal jurisdictional defect, invalidating the entire reassessment.
