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 : Judicial rulings clarify that satisfaction for initiating action against other persons in search cases must be recorded promptly. ...
Income Tax : The High Court held that reassessment proceedings for AY 2013-14 were time-barred after computing the surviving limitation as clar...
Income Tax : Budget 2026 introduces sweeping retrospective amendments affecting limitation, reassessment jurisdiction, DIN validity, and TPO ti...
Income Tax : The new reassessment framework mandates enquiry, hearing, and a reasoned order before reopening. Courts now test jurisdiction on p...
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...
Corporate Law : Non- extension of the Time Barring Date for assessment of reopened cases and issuance of the notices for reopening – difficu...
Income Tax : The ITAT Amritsar held that a valuation report by itself cannot justify addition under Section 69 without evidence of extra paymen...
Income Tax : The Court held that the petitioner had no connection with the entities or individuals from whose devices the disputed material was...
Income Tax : Court upheld the validity of the Section 148 notice but set aside the assessment order after finding that notices were sent to an ...
Income Tax : Tribunal reiterated that credits brought forward from earlier financial years cannot ordinarily be taxed under Section 68 in subse...
Income Tax : The Delhi High Court held that reassessment proceedings cannot be sustained on changing allegations introduced after issuance of n...
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 : Supreme Court in the matter of Shri Ashish Agarwal, several representations were received asking for time-barring date of such cas...
Corporate Law : Income Tax Gazetted Officers’ Association (W.B.) Unit Date: 02.02.2023. To The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, W...
Income Tax : CBDT directed that cases reopened u/s 147/148A in consonance with Judgement of SC in case of UoI vs. Ashish Agarwal & CBDT instruc...
Income Tax : Consequent to order passed by Allahabad High Court passing severe strictures and proposing to levy exemplary cost of Rs 50 lakhs i...
Ernst And Young U.S. LLP Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) Court is of the view that the Petitioner-Assessee has a right to get adequate time in accordance with the Act to submit its reply. Section 148A(b) permits the Assessing Officer to suo moto provide up to thirty days period to an assessee to respond to […]
Analysis of CBDT Instruction dated 11.05.2022 on the validity of notices issued under section 148 for AY 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17, and 2017-18 after 31/03/2021. Uncover legal perspectives and implications.
Delhi High Court invalidates 2018-19 tax assessment, citing inadequate opportunity for defense and procedural violations. Details on the case and court ruling.
Calcutta High Court sets aside IT order in Aman Khetawat vs ITO case due to violation of natural justice. Fresh order instructed. Calcutta High Court sets aside IT order in Aman Khetawat vs ITO case due to violation of natural justice. Fresh order instructed.
Shubham Thakral Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that only three days’ time was granted to the Petitioner to respond as against the mandatory statutory period of at least seven days. He further states that though the annexure annexed with the notice granted the Petitioner eight days’ time to respond, […]
Reading a decision is one thing and interpreting the same is another, isn’t it? Many times, verdict of the decisions written itself per se do not give the correct meaning until the same is read in a proper context or perspective with the facts of each case.
Ester Industries Ltd Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) This Court is of the view that the petitioner/assessee has the right to get adequate time in accordance with the Act to submit its reply. It is pertinent to mention that Section 148A(b) permits the Assessing Officer to suo moto provide up to thirty day’s period to […]
Meenu Chaufla Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) Court is of the view that the petitioner/assessee has the right to get adequate time in accordance with the Act to submit its reply. It is pertinent to mention that Section 148A(b) permits the Assessing Officer to suo moto provide up to thirty days’ period to an assessee […]
Appellant claimed that order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act and notice dated 31st March, 2022 issued under section 148 of the Act have been passed/issued in gross violation of the principles of natural justice.
Rajesh Kumar Malhotra Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) This Court is of the view that the Petitioner has not been provided an adequate opportunity to put forward its defense/reply as the annexure accompanying the notice enumerating the reasons for initiating reassessment pertained to the Assessment Year 2015-16 and not 2018-19. It is pertinent to mention […]
