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 : ITAT held that additions based solely on third-party search material without independent evidence or cross-examination are invalid...
Income Tax : ITAT held that a return filed under section 148 remains valid even if delayed. Failure to issue mandatory notice under section 143...
Income Tax : Judicial rulings clarify that satisfaction for initiating action against other persons in search cases must be recorded promptly. ...
Income Tax : The Finance Bill 2026 proposes allowing taxpayers to file an Updated Return even after receiving a reassessment notice under Secti...
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 Indore held that appellate order violated principles of natural justice after finding that key hearing notices were sent to a...
Income Tax : Court ruled that reassessment notices under Section 148 must be issued through the faceless mechanism under Section 151A and the 2...
Income Tax : The Madras High Court held that reassessment notices required to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer are invalid if issued...
Income Tax : The Madras High Court held that reassessment notices required to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer are invalid if issued...
Income Tax : The Jharkhand High Court held that retrospective insertion of Section 147A removed the jurisdictional challenge against reassessme...
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 Supreme Court dismissed SLPs and upheld the High Court’s finding that reassessment notices lacked tangible material. The ruling reinforces that mere survey findings cannot justify reopening of assessments.
The Tribunal upheld reopening under Section 147 as Form 26AS reflected substantial contract receipts despite no return being filed. It ruled that such information constitutes valid grounds for belief of income escaping assessment.
The issue involved dismissal of appeal due to delay and non-appearance. The tribunal condoned the delay citing medical reasons and remanded the matter for fresh assessment, imposing cost for non-compliance.
The issue was whether reassessment could be initiated after four years without fresh evidence. The court held such reopening invalid when based on existing records and no failure of disclosure.
The issue was whether reassessment notice issued without approval from the correct authority is valid. The tribunal held it invalid and quashed the assessment for lack of jurisdiction.
The Tribunal set aside the assessment after noting that books of accounts were not produced and required reconsideration. It directed a fresh decision with proper opportunity, emphasizing procedural fairness.
The Court held that reassessment proceedings must be initiated within the statutory time limit. It found the notice issued after the deadline to be invalid.
The Tribunal held that since the Assessing Officer made no addition after verifying disclosures, the grievance lacked merit. Grounds were rightly treated as infructuous due to absence of tax impact.
The issue was whether reassessment notice issued after six years was valid. The Court upheld that such notices are time-barred and cannot be sustained under law.
The Court examined whether reassessment notice issued beyond limitation was valid. It held that notices issued after expiry of the six-year limit under the old regime are barred and liable to be set aside.
