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...
ITAT Bangalore held the imposition of penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act is not sustainable since charge of under reporting or mis-reporting not clarified. Thus, penalty cannot be imposed in a light hearted manner or in routine manner.
Bombay High Court sets aside Section 148-A notice issued to Dilip Powar, ruling it as a change of opinion and beyond the permissible time limit.
Delhi High Court held that Form ITNS-150 sets out quantum of tax determination to be paid by assessee in an order u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, thus any amendment thereof is to be made within time limit prescribed under section 154(7) of the Income Tax Act.
Bombay High Court held that reopening of assessment by AO by merely acting under dictation or on borrowed satisfaction without independent application of mind to materials on record is not justifiable in law. Hence, appeal of revenue liable to be dismissed.
ITAT Chandigarh held that cash deposits in assessee’s bank account was less than the amount mentioned in the reopening notice and thus reasons recorded by the AO were not found to be valid and, therefore, the reassessment framed was quashed. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
ITAT Hyderabad held that reopening of assessment u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act is void-ab-initio since income escaped assessment doesn’t exceed Rs. 50 lakhs or more. Accordingly, assessment order passed by AO is quashed.
Additions under Section 69A could not be sustained without concrete evidence and due process and AO had not brought any tangible evidence to prove the alleged cash loan.
Patna High Court held that reassessment proceedings under section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act is justifiable since proceedings initiated within a three year period as per section 149(1) of the Income Tax Act.
Thereafter, there was change in incumbent and fresh opportunity was provided and notice u/s.142(1) was issued. But this notice was returned back with the remarks that “the assessee was not in given address”.
To ensure fairness, the ITAT set aside the CIT(A)’s order and remanded the disputed issues back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing. This decision was made contingent upon the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 2,000 to the Income Tax Department within one month and providing proof of payment.
