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...
Since the reassessment notice was barred by limitation, the tribunal did not examine capital gains issues on merits. The ruling confirms that jurisdictional defects override substantive tax disputes.
The tribunal ruled that reassessment beyond four years is barred when reasons do not allege failure to disclose material facts. Mere suspicion of escaped income is insufficient to override the statutory limitation.
The Supreme Court held that bail was wrongly granted without considering medical and eyewitness evidence. The ruling underscores that serious offences require careful judicial scrutiny before granting bail.
The ITAT held that reopening an assessment after four years without any new tangible material is invalid. A reassessment based merely on re-examining earlier facts was struck down as a change of opinion.
The issue is rising reassessment notices driven by data analytics. The key takeaway is that strong procedural safeguards protect taxpayers.
The tribunal held that amounts already disclosed and taxed as accommodated receipts cannot be taxed again under another head. Separate additions were deleted as they resulted in impermissible double taxation.
The issue was whether reassessment completed after a court stay complied with statutory timelines. The Tribunal held that limitation resumes from the date the stay is vacated, rendering the reassessment time-barred.
The issue was whether reopening based only on portal information is valid. The Tribunal held that absence of independent inquiry and tangible material vitiates reassessment and nullifies the addition.
ITAT Surat held reassessment invalid where notice u/s 148, though dated 31-03-2021, was issued on 01-04-2021 without following s.148A procedure; entire reassessment quashed.
The Tribunal held that section 56(2)(vii)(b) applies automatically when stamp value exceeds purchase price. However, it remanded the matter for DVO valuation to ensure fair determination of market value.
