Income Tax : Judicial rulings clarify that satisfaction for initiating action against other persons in search cases must be recorded promptly. ...
Income Tax : Courts are divided on whether the DRP-specific deadline under Section 144C(13) overrides the general assessment time bar in Sectio...
Income Tax : CBDT issues new compounding guidelines simplifying process, eligibility, charges, and procedures under the Income-tax Act from Oct...
Income Tax : A summary of prosecution offences under Chapter XXII of the Income Tax Act (Sections 275A to 280), detailing the rigorous imprison...
Income Tax : CBDT's new Compounding of Offence Guidelines (2024) simplify the process but maintain strict compliance rules. Learn about eligibi...
Income Tax : Learn about the new block assessment provisions for cases involving searches under section 132 and requisitions under section 132A...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi upheld deletion of a Rs.6 crore addition under Section 68 after finding that the share sale transactions were prope...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT held that a single consolidated satisfaction note covering multiple assessment years without identifying year-wise incr...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that the Assessing Officer wrongly invoked Section 143(3) despite the case being covered under the block assess...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that recording satisfaction under Section 153C is not a mechanical exercise and must clearly establish the rele...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled in favour of the assessee after noting that audited financials, PAN, bank statements, ITRs, confirmations, and ...
Income Tax : Availability of Miscellaneous Functionalities related to ‘Selection of Case of Search Year’ and ‘Relevant Search...
CA Sarbjit Garg Debate as to whether CIT has power to assume jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act in respect of assessments made u/s 153A after obtaining mandatory approval u/s 153D. (The author strongly feels that powers of CIT u/s 263 do not extend to assessments made u/s 153A after obtaining mandatory approval u/s 153D […]
It is well settled that in 153A/C assessments additions cannot be made unless they are based on any incriminating material or inquiries based on such material. It clearly emerges from record that there is neither reference nor reliance on any incriminating material.
Discover the impact of recent amendments to Section 153 of the Income-tax Act, excluding specific periods for assessment and reassessment. Stay informed on the computation of limitation periods, especially in cases involving audits or exchange of information. Effective from 1st June 2013. Consult tax experts for personalized guidance.
If banking facilities are not available at the place where land is purchased no disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961. Unsubstantiated material found in pen drive cannot be considered as a conclusive evidence to make additions
The unsubstantiated loose sheets cannot be considered as a conclusive evidence to make any addition towards undisclosed income. It was held by the Supreme Court in the case of CBI vs. V.C. Shukla (1998) 3 SCC 410 that ‘file containing loose sheets of papers are not books’ and hence entries therein are not admissible u/s. 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872.
It is an established way of computation of income where ever there is recycling of cash in a financial business to work out the peak credit. Particularly in a situation, when no regular or proper books of account are maintained by the assessee then a cash flow statement is generally prepared.
Assessment proceedings under section 153A of the Act are invalid as no panchnamas were drawn in the names of 22 petitioners. Another aspect of the said contention relating to validity of proceedings under Section 153A of the Act has been also raised.
MGF Automobiles Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) The brief facts of the case are that search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, was carried out in the case of assessee on 12.09.2007 and, therefore, notice u/s 153 A of Income Tax Act dated 17.10.2008 was issued to the assessee requiring it to file income tax returns. The assessee filed returns of income for assessment year 2004-05 and assessment year 2005-06 declaring Nil income in respect of assessment year 2004-05 and income of Rs.50,04,700/- for assessment year 2005-06.
In the present case it is apparent that on the date of search be on 12/09/2007, the assessments for assessment year 2004-05 & 2005-06 were already completed. There was no incriminating material found during search for these years as is apparent from arguments of Ld.
In the present case, in September 2007 the search was carried out in the premises of Dr. Yogi Raj Sharma. The document Annexure RJ-1 was seized by the respondents. At the relevant time petitioner no. 1 was the Chief Health Secretary and this fact was within the knowledge
