Income Tax : ITAT Chennai rules unaccounted customer deposits, with traceable identities and commercial substance, are liabilities, not income ...
Income Tax : Budget 2025 revises block assessment rules for search cases, covering undisclosed income, assessment procedures, penalties, and ti...
Income Tax : Explore reintroduction of block assessments under Income Tax Act via Finance Act 2024, its implications, challenges, and way forwa...
Income Tax : Understand the compounding of offences under the Income-tax Act, 1961, including categories, charges, and procedures as per the Fi...
Income Tax : Learn about prosecution under IT Act sections 275A to 280, including penalties and conditions for launching prosecution....
Income Tax : Learn about the new block assessment provisions for cases involving searches under section 132 and requisitions under section 132A...
Income Tax : ITAT Nagpur held that addition on account of LTCG in the hands of firm not justified as property is belonged to the partner in his...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that taxing entire unaccounted cash receipts or on-money receipts not justified as only profit embedded in suc...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that claim of interest u/s. 24b of the Income Tax Act was duly examined during original as well as reassessment pr...
Income Tax : Kerala High Court held that section 245C doesn’t prescribed any prior cut-off date for filing settlement application. Unadjudica...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that granting of single approval under section 153D of the Income Tax Act for difference assessment years and that...
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.
