Income Tax : Explore how electronic data transforms tax assessments, highlighting accuracy issues, verification needs, and taxpayer rights as s...
Income Tax : Learn about the revised procedure for reopening cases under Section 148 RWS 135A and the implications of Finance Act 2021, includi...
Income Tax : Discover the key amendments in the Finance (No.2) Bill, 2024, affecting income tax reassessment procedures under the Income-tax Ac...
Income Tax : Explore the Bombay High Court's ruling on the invalidity of a reassessment notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, f...
Income Tax : Explore the legality of issuing a second notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the same assessment year. Unders...
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 : Bombay High Court held that issuance of notice under section 148A of the Income Tax Act by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and no...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata held that CIT has not applied his mind analytically while assuming jurisdiction for taking cognizance under section 2...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune restored the assessment order as assessee neither filed any evidence nor provided material in an attempt to discharge th...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court held that reassessment action under section 148 of the Income Tax Act post approval of the resolution plan unsust...
Income Tax : Patna High Court held that for migrating PAN to new AO, due to change in address, a written request to existing AO must be made. S...
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...
Corporate Law : Income Tax Gazetted Officers’ Association (W.B.) Unit Date: 02.02.2023. To The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, W...
Income Tax : Consequent to order passed by Allahabad High Court passing severe strictures and proposing to levy exemplary cost of Rs 50 lakhs i...
Impugned order and notice indicated that sanctioning authority was PCIT. However, since issuance date of both documents was beyond three years from relevant assessment year, Section 151(ii) of Act mandated that sanctioning authority should have been PCCIT.
ITAT held that if sales are not disputed and there is no discrepancy between purchases and declared sales, addition should be restricted to bring gross profit on alleged bogus purchases in line with other genuine purchases.
Assessee was incorporated in Japan and was in the business of providing telecommunication services. Assessee provided fixed, mobile, wholesale, and associated telecommunication services across the globe.
Assessee had issued share application money and subsequently allotted shares which showed that the transactions were genuine and there was no material brought on record by tax authorities that the assessee had benefited from round-tripping, therefore, ITAT had deleted the addition made u/s 68.
Analysis of Kundal Raghubir Bhandari Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) case reveals flaws in assessment based on unverified third-party statements. Learn more about this significant legal ruling.
Mumbai ITAT rules in Lalita Troy Caeiro Vs ITO case that assessment can’t be reopened beyond 4 years if there’s full disclosure by assessee. Detailed analysis and conclusion provided.
in terms of section 249(4)(a) of the Act, stipulation as to payment of tax ante filing of first appeal is only directory and not mandatory, where appeal is filed without payment of tax but subsequently required amount of tax is paid, appeal shall be admitted on making payment of tax and taken up for hearing on merits.
In case of Balaji Mines And Minerals Pvt Ltd vs ACIT, Bombay High Court ruled that reassessment cannot be based solely on reasons borrowed from other departments or reports, such as Justice M.B. Shah Commission Report.
Allahabad High Court quashes benami transaction proceedings in Smt. Meera Pandey Vs Union of India case, stating contractor’s statement alone insufficient. Read full judgment.
In Nimir Kishore Mehta Vs ACIT, Bombay High Court invalidates notice & order under Section 148A(b), ruling AO lacked jurisdiction. Details & analysis here.
