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 Delhi held that addition towards unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act unjustified as necessary details explaining the source of credit entries duly provided.
Madras High Court held the writ petition as premature as it is open to the petitioner to raise all the objections before the assessing authority in respect of show cause notice before completion of assessment. Accordingly, writ petition disposed of.
ITAT Raipur held that addition on account of discount allowed to sister concern unsustainable as assessee duly placed on record documentary evidence to substantiate the factum of having sold low-quality sponge iron to its sister concern. Accordingly, rejection of discount merely on the basis of doubts and suspicion unjustified.
ITAT Delhi held that reopening of assessment without any link between the tangible material and formation of belief of AO that income has escaped assessment is unsustainable and bad-in-law and hence liable to be quashed.
ITAT Kolkata held that as assessee has provided the explanation with documentary evidence and such documents have not been held as false either by AO during assessment proceedings or during penalty proceedings. Hence, penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) not leviable.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that once the Income Tax Settlement Commission has passed final order u/s. 245D of the Income Tax Act, AO has no jurisdiction to reopen the same u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act.
In a significant ruling, ITAT Ahmedabad declares an assessment order void, passed in the name of a non-existent entity after a court-approved amalgamation.
In the Subba Raju Chekuri Vs. ITO case, ITAT Hyderabad remands matter due to the failure of the assessee to provide evidence for Section 54F deduction claim.
Bombay High Court held that the reopening notice can be sustained only on the basis of the ground mentioned in the reasons recorded. It is not open to the revenue to add and/or supplement later the reasons recorded at the time of reopening notice. Accordingly, reassessment proceedings set aside.
The Kerala High Court quashes a reassessment order, citing a violation of mandatory provisions under the Income Tax Act. Details in the article.
