Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
Income Tax : Learn the updated provisions governing rectification, assessments, reassessments, and appeals under the Income-tax Act. This guide...
Income Tax : The article explains how the Finance Acts, 2025 and 2026 have reshaped the Updated Return regime under Section 139(8A). It highlig...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court has remitted reassessment cases for fresh consideration after the retrospective insertion of Section 147A, leavi...
Income Tax : This article explains why reassessment proceedings may be invalid if the Assessing Officer merely relies on Investigation Wing rep...
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 : Humble Representation for modification of Section 151 of the Income Tax Act relating to Sanction for issue of Notice under sec. 14...
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 : ITAT Mumbai held that customs duty collections received by a CHA in a fiduciary capacity are not taxable under Section 69A and del...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune held reassessment under Sections 147/148 invalid as no mandatory Section 143(2) notice was issued after a valid return f...
Income Tax : Bombay HC quashed Section 148 notices, holding that search-based material required proceedings under Sections 153A/153C, not Secti...
Income Tax : Karnataka HC held Section 147 reopening invalid where seized material from a third-party search required proceedings under Section...
Income Tax : SC dismissed the SLP, leaving intact the HC ruling that Section 147 reopening was invalid where Section 153C procedure applied....
Income Tax : The department has identified high-risk cases through its Insight Portal for AYs 2022-25. It directs officers to initiate reassess...
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...
Income Tax : Explore the latest guidelines for issuing notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Understand key procedures, amendme...
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...
The issue was whether reassessment beyond three years was valid without approval from the correct authority. ITAT held the notice void as sanction was taken from the wrong officer, reaffirming strict compliance with Section 151.
The issue was whether reopening is valid when the information relied upon is not shared. The Tribunal held that failure to supply such material violates natural justice and vitiates reassessment.
The case examined whether reassessment after four years was valid when the issues were already examined in scrutiny. The Tribunal held the reopening invalid as a mere change of opinion and quashed the reassessment.
The court held that an excel sheet found during a search, indicating a cash transaction, constituted valid information to reopen assessment.
It was ruled that speculative losses from non-genuine share transactions cannot be adjusted against interest income. The decision reinforces strict application of sections 43(5) and 73 where delivery is doubtful.
Where compensation and interest are deposited under judicial custody due to a pending appeal, no real income accrues. The Tribunal ruled that taxing such MACT interest is impermissible until actual receipt.
The issue was whether reassessment could be initiated beyond four years after a completed scrutiny assessment. The Tribunal held that reopening was barred as there was no failure to disclose material facts.
ITAT Mumbai held that artificial profits or losses arising from Client Code Modification in share transactions carried out in F&O segment requires transaction-wise reconciliation. Accordingly, matter restore to the file of AO.
The issue was whether a reassessment notice issued after the surviving limitation period was valid. The Tribunal held the notice time-barred in light of the Supreme Court ruling, rendering the entire reassessment invalid.
The Tribunal ruled that appellate authorities must adjudicate each legal and factual ground raised in appeal. A mere remand to the AO without deciding jurisdictional issues violates statutory requirements.
