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...
Kerala High Court held that court cannot interfere with order of settlement commission if challenge is merely that Settlement Commission has chosen to take one of two possible views that can be legally taken in respect of an issue. Accordingly, writ disposed of.
Delhi High Court rules on Section 153C notices for AYs 2014-15 to 2020-21 in Dev Technofab Limited Vs DCIT, citing lack of incriminating material for reopening assessments.
ITAT Bangalore held that ignorance of law is not a ground for condonation of delay, hence delay of 879 days in filing of an appeal without any sufficient reason shown is not condonable. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
ITAT Raipur held that AO has passed the final assessment order u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 153B(b) of the Act without seeking a prior approval of the same by the Jt. CIT u/s. 153D of the Income Tax Act and hence the order so passed is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Chennai held that revisionary proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act for invoking penalty provisions u/s. 270A(9)(e) without issue of intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act is unjustifiable and untenable in law.
Budget 2025 revises block assessment rules for search cases, covering undisclosed income, assessment procedures, penalties, and time limits under I-T Act Sections 158B-158BG.
Delhi High Court held that deeming income from house property @50% merely on the assumption that assessee was signatory to the instrument is untenable in law since assessee doesn’t own beneficial interest in the property.
Addition made under Section 69A for an alleged unexplained cash loan was not justified as assessee provided evidence of receiving the loan through banking channels and not through cash.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that entire assessments has been restored to the file of CIT(A) for de novo consideration since assessee was found to be absolutely non-cooperative and took every step to thwart/stonewall the assessment proceedings.
ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69 towards unexplained investment merely based on loose sheets without any corroborative evidences is unsustainable in law. Also held that addition on the basis of mere assumption and presumption not sustainable.
