Income Tax : Delhi HC rules in PCIT Vs Pavitra Realcon Pvt. Ltd., ITA 579/2018, emphasizing the need for corroborative evidence in tax assessme...
Income Tax : Explore the intricacies of invoking Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, as clarified by the Delhi High Court, regarding the posses...
Income Tax : Delve into the provisions of Income Tax Act Sections 153A & 153C, governing assessments after search or requisition. Learn from co...
Income Tax : Learn about Section 147 to 153 Income Escaping Assessment and Reopening of Cases Under Income Tax Act, 1961. Get guidance on the p...
CA, CS, CMA : Discover the major changes in ITR forms for FY 2023-24 (AY 2024-2025). Highlights include new sections for retirement benefit acco...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court dismisses Revenue’s appeal as unsigned excel sheet lacks corroboration in S. 153C Income Tax Act proceedings....
Income Tax : Read the Kerala High Court judgment on income tax assessments involving Sunny Jacob Jewellers. Analysis includes AO's authority un...
Income Tax : The ITAT Bangalore ruled that income tax additions can't be based solely on unsubstantiated loose slips, emphasizing the need for ...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court rules that reassessment actions post-2021 searches must meet the First Proviso to Section 149(1) of the Income Ta...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court rules Section 153C assessments beyond the 10-year limit unsustainable, quashing notices for AY 2013-14. Key judgm...
Income Tax : Central Government has decided to extend the time limits to 30th June, 2021 in the following cases where the time limit was earlie...
Income Tax : Availability of Miscellaneous Functionalities related to ‘Selection of Case of Search Year’ and ‘Relevant Search...
ITAT-Ahmedabad In the case of M/s Shiv Associates v DCIT quashed the notice u/s 153C relying on the Judgment of the similar case related to the assessee in which the notices u/s 153C were quashed as no satisfaction was recorded by the AO.
Shri Govind G. Sarawagi HUF Vs. ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)- Name of the HUF, who is separate taxable entity, is no where available in the Panchnama. It is also pertinent to note that all the members of the HUF were not covered under the search action.
a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then, the books of account or documents or assets, seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person ] and that Assessing Officer shall proceed against
Pepsico India Holdings Private Ltd vs. ACIT (Delhi High Court)-Possession of documents and possession of photocopies of documents are two separate things. While the Jai puria Group may be the owner of the photocopies of the documents it is quite possible that the originals may be owned by some other person.
ACIT Vs. S.P.Cold Storage (ITAT Raipur)- Mere mentioning of name in Search Warrant & Panchanama not sufficient for contemplating search against the assessee firm, Search at the residential premises of the Partners could not be deemed to be a search on the assessee firm
A search took place on 14.02.2006 in the premises of M/s Radico Khaitan.In the course of these search proceedings, various documents including reports narrating amounts alleged to have been received or receivable from various members of the UPDA and the basis thereof were recovered.
ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of M/s. Parshwa Corporation Vs. DCIT observed the basic necessities & condition for issuing notice u/s 153 C and it was held that it is mandatory to follow the procedure prescribed under the section i.e. (1) Satisfaction is to be recorded by the Assessing Officer of the persons searched;
Completed assessments can be interfered with by the AO while making the assessment under Section 153 A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course
In an appeal no.523/2013, the assessee was engaged in the operation of a Container Freight Station (CFS). It filed a return of income on 08.10.2008 declaring total income at Rs. Nil after claiming deduction of Rs.210713675/- u/s 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act,1961
Document found during search was a third party document which was neither in the handwriting of the assessee nor bears her signature. Its inference has to be taken as stated by the person who possessed the document.
