Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
Income Tax : Learn the updated provisions governing rectification, assessments, reassessments, and appeals under the Income-tax Act. This guide...
Income Tax : The article explains how the Finance Acts, 2025 and 2026 have reshaped the Updated Return regime under Section 139(8A). It highlig...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court has remitted reassessment cases for fresh consideration after the retrospective insertion of Section 147A, leavi...
Income Tax : This article explains why reassessment proceedings may be invalid if the Assessing Officer merely relies on Investigation Wing rep...
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 HC quashed Section 148 reopening for AY 2013-14, holding Section 43CA was inapplicable and stamp duty valuation alone could...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune quashed a Section 148 notice based on vague information and directed deletion of a ₹51.35 lakh addition for lack of su...
Income Tax : Where unaccounted sales were established through seized material, only the net profit embedded therein was liable to tax, and not ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai remanded the case to examine whether Section 56(2)(x) applied based on the agreement date and to consider refund of ex...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore remanded a Section 69A addition after holding that an APMC commission agent's entire sale proceeds could not be tre...
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 Kolkata held that undisclosed commission income on accommodation entries to be added @0.15% instead of 1%. Accordingly, AO directed to compute the rate the commission @0.15% and not 1%.
ITAT Agra held that dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) merely because the assessee did not comply with the notices issued by CIT(A), without adjudicating issues arising in the appeal on merits, is not sustainable in the eyes of law keeping in view provisions of Section 250(6).
Whether or not a permanent establishment existed in a State during a given period must be determined on the basis of the circumstances applicable during that period and not those applicable during a past or future period.
Assessee, aggrieved by the decision, appealed to the CIT (Appeals), who dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision of AO. Assessee dissatisfied with the order of CIT(A) appealed before Tribunal.
There was no provision under the DTVSV Act that empowered a Designated Authority to reopen a concluded settlement. Once a final certificate was issued under Section 5(1), all disputes with regard to the ‘tax arrear’ stood concluded.
Where assessee had produced ledger accounts, AO did not have any material to substantiate that deposits aggregating ₹66,44,134/- were made in assessee’s bank account to contradict the same.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition on grounds other than grounds forming part of reasons recorded for reopening of assessment not justified. Accordingly, addition towards unexplained investment which didn’t form part of reasons liable to be deleted.
Delhi High Court held that ITAT cannot address the ground which remained unaddressed by CIT(A). Accordingly, matter restored back to CIT(A) to decide on the grounds that were not decided.
Assessee didnot file return for the year under consideration. As per AIMS module information received that assessee has deposited the amount of Rs.16,84,100/- as cash during the demonetization period. Case was reopened notice was issued accordingly.
In response to the said notice, the son/legal heir of the deceased assessee submitted a reply on 01 April 2023 wherein he unequivocally apprised the respondent of the demise of his father/assessee, furnishing alongwith a copy of the death certificate as conclusive evidence, and asserted that the notice was null and void ab initio.
