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 case examined whether compensation paid to exit prior agreements was a sham arrangement. The Tribunal ruled it was a valid bus...
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 : Availability of Miscellaneous Functionalities related to ‘Selection of Case of Search Year’ and ‘Relevant Search...
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.
ITAT Jaipur held that addition towards undisclosed income rightly sustained since assessee failed to explain the incriminating material found during the course of search. Penalty under section 271AAB too sustained.
Madras High Court held that the recording of satisfaction note is pre- requisite before initiating proceeding under section 153C of the Income Tax Act. In absence of the same, assessment order is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
The assessee is a private limited company. Post completion of assessment u/s. 143(3)/153A, reassessment u/s. 148 was initiated. However, AO accepted the contention of the assessee and passed order u/s. 143(3)/ 147.
Madhya Pradesh High Court condones delay in Neel Kumar Ajmera’s ITAT appeal, setting aside dismissal due to limitation and remanding the case for fresh adjudication.
During the course of a survey, it was seen that the assessee had defaulted in deducting tax at source on interest paid to AGE Patel Joint Venture (JV) in Financial Year (FY) 2016-17 on Mobilisation advance and Machinery advance.
ITAT Hyderabad held that addition on the basis of loose papers and documents found from the premises of third party is not tenable in the eye of law. Accordingly, appeal of the revenue is dismissed since addition not based on substantial evidence.
Gauhati High Court held that addition merely on the basis of retracted statement without any other relied upon evidence/ material is not sustainable since retracted statement cannot be termed as incriminating material. Hence, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Delhi High Court held that Section 260A of the Income Tax Act refrains from incorporating a specific provision permitting the filing of a cross-objection. Thus, cross objection would not be maintainable.
ITAT Jaipur sets aside Resonance Eduventures assessment orders, citing mechanical approval by Addl. CIT without proper application of mind as mandated under Section 153D.
