Income Tax : Judicial rulings clarify that Section 54 focuses on timely investment of capital gains, not rigid legal ownership milestones. The ...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that an assessment completed before receiving the DVO report under section 50C(2) is invalid. All additions and disa...
Income Tax : Understand the statutory time limits for filings, applications, approvals, and settlement processes under the Income-tax Act, incl...
Income Tax : Learn the scope, time limits, and procedure for correcting mistakes apparent from records under Section 154, including appeal rest...
Income Tax : Faceless Income-tax proceedings and e-assessments under Section 144B simplify taxpayer compliance. Use the e-filing portal for ele...
Income Tax : KSCAA has made a Representation on Challenges in Income Tax Related to Rectification Proceedings, Order Giving Effect, Delay in P...
Income Tax : Even after due efforts taken by the Government to ensure compliance relating to filing of TDS returns by the deductors, the defaul...
Income Tax : Taxpayers who are not satisfied with the outcome of processing of their Income Tax Return by the Centralized Processing Centre, Be...
Income Tax : Department introduces new facility for online submission of rectification request in cases where processing was completed by CPC B...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that addition of Rs. 13 lakh under Section 69A through rectification proceedings exceeded the scope of Section...
Income Tax : Tribunal held that deduction for bad debts is allowable in the year in which the debts are actually written off in the books of ac...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi held that the Assessing Officer could not alter book profit under Section 115JB by disallowing losses from alleged ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that Form 3CL issued by DSIR could not be treated as additional evidence during rectification proceedings since i...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that lawful TDS credit cannot be denied merely because the Assessing Officer overlooked an earlier rectification o...
Income Tax : Taxpayers who are not satisfied with the outcome of processing of their Income Tax Return by the Centralized Processing Centre, Be...
Income Tax : Instruction No. 02/2016 Section 154 of the Act mandates that rectification order shall be passed in writing by the Income Tax auth...
Income Tax : Instruction No. 01/2016 section 154 stipulates that where application for amendment is made by assessee/deductor/collector with a...
Income Tax : 225/148/2015-ITA-II Expeditious disposal of applications for rectification under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) dur...
Income Tax : INSTRUCTION NO. 3/2013 Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide Judgment in case of Court On its Own Motion v. UOI and Ors. in W.P. (C) 2659/...
ITAT Delhi held that CPC wrongly processed return by considering due date as 5th August instead of 31st October. Accordingly, interest charged under section 234A of the Income Tax Act deleted and interest charged under section 234B altered.
Delhi HC ruled reassessment under Section 147 is not valid post-closure of Section 143 proceedings if income underassessment results from AO error, not assessee fault.
Assessee had been mainly providing e-platform for conducting e-auction, e-procurement services for disposal of scrap arisings, surplus stores, etc. from PSUs and Government Departments including Defence.
ITAT Ahmedabad directs AO to grant TDS credit to Shiva Pharmachem, even with certificates under merged company’s name, provided income is assessed with the assessee.
Bombay HC rules in favor of Kusharaj Bhandary, nullifying an assessment and penalty order due to TDS credit error. Outcome highlights rectification rights.
TPO proposed transfer pricing adjustments of INR 1,03,26,939/-. According to TPO, appellant had advance funds to its AE [i.e. Golden Harvest Middle East (FZC)] under the grab of share application money and there was inordinate delay in allotment of shares.
ITAT Kolkata held that when date of agreement and date of registration are not same, then, stamp duty value on the date of agreement should be considered. Accordingly, since difference is less than 10%, hence addition u/s. 56(2)(vii) unjustified.
ITAT Kolkata held that allotment letter given by the developer to the assessee way back in 2010 would be construed as an agreement of purchase between the developer and the assessee. Thus, addition u/s. 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act not survived.
Reassessment initiated under an invalid notice issued under Section 148 as there was no new material with AO after four years that the assessee had escaped assessment, therefore, additions amounting to ₹6.93 crores was deleted.
Once CESTAT had given a findings that the purchases in question were not bogus, then, additions proposed to be made on the basis of show-cause notice from Central Excise Directorate had no basis which the same could be sustained.
