Income Tax : This document provides a complete reference on compounding of offences, including application procedures, offence-wise charges, re...
Income Tax : The FAQs explain the revised CBDT guidelines on compounding offences under the Income-tax Act effective from 17 October 2024. They...
Income Tax : The FAQs explain the prosecution provisions under the Income-tax Act, covering offences such as tax evasion, non-payment of TDS/TC...
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 : Learn about the new block assessment provisions for cases involving searches under section 132 and requisitions under section 132A...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi quashed a Section 153C assessment, holding that a consolidated and defective satisfaction note invalidated jurisdiction...
Income Tax : ITAT held that a registered sale deed without corroborative evidence is not incriminating material and cannot support additions in...
Income Tax : ITAT held reassessment under Sections 147/148 invalid because it was based on a pre-1 April 2021 third-party search, requiring pro...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai quashed a Section 148 notice issued after the limitation under the first proviso to Section 149, holding the reassessm...
Income Tax : ITAT held that penalty under Section 271D cannot survive where the Assessing Officer failed to record satisfaction in the assessme...
Income Tax : Availability of Miscellaneous Functionalities related to ‘Selection of Case of Search Year’ and ‘Relevant Search...
ITAT Delhi held that for an unabated year, additions under section 153A require incriminating material. A seized loose sheet and retracted statements lacked corroboration, leading to deletion of the ₹100 crore addition.
The issue was whether section 68 additions could survive when loans were already repaid. The Tribunal held that once the assessee is no longer a beneficiary, such additions are unsustainable.
ITAT Patna held that consolidated approval under section 153D of the Income Tax Act granted in mechanical manner by JCIT without application of mind is invalid and hence assessment framed thereon is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Delhi held that day of arrival should be excluded while computing number of stayed in India. Accordingly, the status of assessee is non-resident. Thus, the appeals of the assessee is allowed.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition made on the basis of third-party WhatsApp chat without any incriminating material is unsustainable in law. Accordingly, order of CIT(A) upheld and appeal of revenue is dismissed.
Emphasising strict compliance, the Tribunal ruled that assessments under section 153A without prior section 153D approval are invalid. Cross-objections became infructuous once Revenue appeals were dismissed.
This case addressed whether tax appeals survive a moratorium under insolvency law. The ruling confirms that income tax proceedings stand stayed once a moratorium is imposed.
The Tribunal deleted both substantive and protective additions made across multiple years on the same alleged receipts. It held that such duplication results in impermissible multiple taxation of identical amounts.
The issue was whether a search-based assessment could be completed within 12 months after a Supreme Court ruling. The Court held that only the 60-day extended period under section 153B applied, rendering the assessment time-barred.
The Tribunal held that a common, perfunctory sanction under Section 153D is invalid. The key takeaway is that lack of independent application of mind vitiates search assessments entirely.
