Income Tax : The FAQs explain the revised CBDT guidelines on compounding offences under the Income-tax Act effective from 17 October 2024. They...
Income Tax : The article explains who can file appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the orders that are appealable, applicable tim...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that additions cannot stand without a clear link between seized material and the assessee. It ruled that third-p...
Income Tax : Judicial rulings clarify that satisfaction for initiating action against other persons in search cases must be recorded promptly. ...
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 Gujarat High Court quashed a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 after finding that a loose paper seized from a third...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi held that a common satisfaction note covering multiple assessment years without year-wise incriminating material co...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi held that the Assessing Officer failed to record that the seized material had a bearing on the determination of the...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi held that a single satisfaction note covering multiple assessment years without identifying year-wise incriminating...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi held that a single consolidated satisfaction note covering multiple assessment years without year-wise incriminatin...
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...
In Peter Vaz vs CIT, Bombay HC rules ITAT erred in barring Sec 153C challenge & refusing delay condonation. Cites Rule 27, Balakrishnan (SC). Matter remanded.
ITAT Kolkata quashes reassessment u/s 147, stating that search-based findings must follow Section 153C. Read the full case details and judgment summary.
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.
Delhi High Court dismissed the revenue’s appeal in PCIT Vs S.G. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., citing jurisdictional lapses and lack of fresh material for reassessment.
ITAT Jaipur quashes addition of suppressed school fees for Pushpa Vidya Niketan, stating survey statements lack evidentiary value without corroboration.
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 Nagpur held that addition under section 69C towards unexplained expenditure is liable to be deleted due to lack of corroborative and strong evidence. Accordingly, appeal of the department dismissed.
During the course of search and seizure operation, several incriminating documents related to the assessee were found and seized from the residential premises of Shri Prashant Bongirwar.
Interest paid on late payment of TDS was not an expenditure wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of business and further it was a payment, which was in the form of tax, so it was not an allowable expenditure.
In pursuance of search, notice u/s.153A was issued and in response, assessee also filed its return of income. AO noted that assessee had taken loan from four parties during the years under consideration.
