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 Tribunal set aside the appellate order as the assessee sought another chance to prove the genuineness of expenses. It directed fresh assessment after proper opportunity of hearing.
ITAT held that additions based solely on third-party search material without independent evidence or cross-examination are invalid. The burden of proof lies on the department.
The Court declined to interfere after finding no sufficient reason to disturb the High Court’s decision. The ruling reinforces limits on appellate intervention.
The Court set aside Section 148 notices after finding no tangible evidence supporting the existence of a Permanent Establishment. The ruling highlights the need for concrete material in reassessment.
Delhi High Court held that challenge to reassessment proceedings initiated under Income Tax Act failed as Court cannot act as an AO and call such documents which otherwise can be done by AO. Accordingly, petition dismissed.
Interest earned on funds kept in bank during business setup, when those funds were directly linked to the project, was a capital receipt and not taxable as “income from other sources
Karnataka High Court quashes Sec 148A(d), Sec 148 notice and ex-parte assessment due to non-receipt of Sec 148A(b) notice; remands for fresh reply, keeps all issues open.
The issue was whether a reassessment notice issued by a jurisdictional officer instead of a faceless officer is valid. The Court held it to be a fatal defect and quashed the notice.
The issue involved taxing capital gains from a development agreement in multiple years. The court held the same income cannot be taxed twice and set aside the addition subject to verification.
ITAT Mumbai upheld 12.5% addition on alleged bogus purchases, ruling that only profit element can be taxed since sales were accepted; full disallowance or 25% addition was held excessive and unjustified.
