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 Tribunal held that loan repayment cannot be treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The addition was deleted as i...
Income Tax : The issue was whether a notice granting less than the statutory minimum time is valid. The tribunal held that giving less than 7 d...
Income Tax : Reassessment proceedings was invalid for a notice issued beyond three years without the sanction of the prescribed higher authorit...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that unsigned excel sheets without supporting evidence cannot justify additions. It ruled that absence of corrob...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai deletes Section 69 additions holding that third-party excel sheets and statements without corroborative evidence lack ...
Income Tax : Availability of Miscellaneous Functionalities related to ‘Selection of Case of Search Year’ and ‘Relevant Search...
The JDA was signed between one Mr. U.K. Hasanabba and Mr. U. Ibrahim on one side as landowners and Mr. Abdul Khader K (on behalf of the assessee) and Mr. K. Hussain Abbas (on behalf of the HNGC Builders and Developers).
Bombay High Court held that Court cannot exercise its discretionary jurisdiction to restrain income tax officers from proceedings with assessment proceedings where huge unaccounted income in accommodation entry has been detected.
Madras High Court sets aside IT assessment orders for Vetrivel Minerals citing lack of incriminating evidence and breach of natural justice principles.
Delhi High Court held that section 153C of the Income Tax Act doesn’t required AO to find or uncover a relationship or an association between the searched and the non-searched person.
ITAT Chennai rules on Sakthi Realty case, deleting additions for unexplained deposits. Details on customer deposits, tax assessment, and tribunal’s decision.
ITAT Chennai rules unaccounted customer deposits, with traceable identities and commercial substance, are liabilities, not income under Section 68.
Rajasthan High Court held that initiation of proceedings under section 153C of the Income Tax Act based on WhatsApp chats with specific inputs cannot be said to be vague or hit by the strict parameters of Section 153C of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Delhi held that the approval granted u/s. 153D in the nature of a ‘technical approval’ in symbolic exercise of powers under s. 153D. Hence, the consequential assessment orders based on such repugnant approval under s. 153D is bad in law in tune with earlier years.
Karnataka High Court held that blocking of Electronic Credit Ledger by invoking Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 [CGST Rules] without granting pre-decisional hearing and without stating cogent reason in order is impermissible in law.
Madras High Court held that re-opening of assessment u/s. 147 must be based on some tangible material without such tangible material, re-opening is merely inspired from change of opinion and hence the same is liable to be quashed.
