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...
Construction was funded through borrowed money, and assessee sought to utilize the account funds to repay the debt. However, Department denied the request to close the account and release funds citing incomplete construction, use of borrowed funds, non-filing of returns for the relevant assessment years, and non-compliance with Section 54F conditions.
ITAT Indore held that reopening of assessment done by Assessing Officer under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, based on tax audit report already available during original assessment, without any fresh and new material is invalid and liable to be quashed.
Bangalore ITAT restored a case involving Rs.1.49 crore in unexplained cash deposits for fresh assessment, directing the AO to re-examine the source and the CIT(A)’s application of the peak credit method.
The ITAT Delhi quashed the reassessment against Lombard Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., ruling the Section 148 notice was time-barred. Following the Supreme Court’s mandate in the Ashish Agarwal case.
Since the last date, or the surviving time, for issuing a valid notice under Section 148 for this specific case was June 17, 2022 and the actual notice was issued on August 24, 2022, it was clearly barred by limitation.
ITAT Nagpur held that short term capital gain tax paid under section 111A @15% cannot be reclassified as taxable under section 68 read with section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act without any basis. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
ITAT Delhi rules that reassessment beyond 10 years is void, holding satisfaction note date governs limitation; ₹2.25 Cr addition for AY 2012-13 deleted.
The ITAT Mumbai quashed the reassessment notice against Saif Ali Khan (AY 2016-17), holding the AO improperly obtained approval from the Pr. CIT instead of the Pr. CCIT for reopening beyond the three-year limit.
Delhi ITAT confirms that a private trust with identifiable beneficiaries is eligible for the capital gains exemption under Section 54F, similar to an individual.
Bangalore ITAT restricted the s.69A unexplained cash addition for non-filer Umesh Babu to the peak credit of Rs.12.25 lakhs, rejecting the Rs.ｹ57.10 lakhs addition.
