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 held that reopening based on a specific appellate direction is legally valid under section 150(1). The key takeaway is that such directions must be challenged separately and cannot be questioned collaterally in reassessment proceedings.
The tribunal held that taxing the full sale consideration as short-term capital gain without allowing cost of acquisition is legally incorrect. Capital gains must be computed on net gains, not gross receipts.
Although the Revenue followed the new reassessment procedure, the notice was issued beyond the allowable time. The Tribunal set aside the reassessment as void ab initio.
The tribunal held that estimating commission income at 1% without verifying the existence of a genuine Shroff business was legally unsustainable. The matter was remanded for fresh examination by the Assessing Officer.
The tribunal held that refusal to condone delay defeats substantial justice when reasonable cause exists. Delay was directed to be condoned and appeal heard on merits.
Where funds were merely routed through the assessee’s bank account, the tribunal ruled that only commission income is taxable. The earlier 2% estimation was reduced to 1.5% as more reasonable.
Capital gains were computed without allowing improvement costs due to submission of an incorrect valuation report. The Tribunal held that a bona fide mistake justified reconsideration with correct evidence.
The core issue was whether lack of knowledge of proceedings justified late appeals. The Tribunal held that notices sent to an inaccessible email amounted to sufficient cause. The decision emphasizes procedural fairness.
The Court ruled that omission to issue Section 143(2) vitiates reassessment at the root. Such a defect cannot be cured, even if the return is alleged to be defective.
The High Court held that long-held, undeveloped land sold by the assessee gave rise to capital gains. Intention, holding period, and conduct outweighed Revenue assumptions.
