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...
ITAT Chennai analyzes the applicability of Section 115BBE to seized cash and gold coins in the case of Uthangarai Sri Vidya Mandir Educational Trust. The trust argued that Section 115BBE applies only if no explanation is provided for the income.
Explore the legal battle between ACIT and Serajuddin & Co. Kolkata, as the High Court evaluates ITAT’s approval process under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chennai deletes Rs. 16.8 lakhs addition, finding no evidence to prove properties sold by taxpayer were agricultural land in D. Ramagopal Vs ACIT case.
Delhi High Court ruling: Assessing Officer cannot assume jurisdiction under Section 147 of Income Tax Act without proper grounds. Detailed analysis and judgment.
Read the detailed analysis of Amit Katyal Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) where no corroborative evidence was found to prove a Rs. 5 crore payment, leading to deletion of the addition.
Explore Section 153A of Income Tax Act, its implications, and judicial interpretations. Learn about search proceedings, panchnama, and assessment challenges.
Delhi High Court held that the documents which were seized during the course of search does was unsigned Agreement to sell (ATS) which does not contain name of assessee, the said material cannot be said to pertain/pertains to assessee.
ITAT Delhi deletes Rs. 89.7 Lakhs addition u/s 68 IT Act in ACIT vs. Daya Rani. Detailed analysis of taxpayer’s explanation for capital enhancement.
In DCIT Vs Nilesh Shantilal Tank case, Mumbai ITAT confirms 12.5% gross profit margin on alleged bogus purchases as sales remain undisputed. Full text of the order included.
Analysis of Kundal Raghubir Bhandari Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) case reveals flaws in assessment based on unverified third-party statements. Learn more about this significant legal ruling.
