Income Tax : The three-judge bench of Supreme Court of India in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/S Pepsi Foods Ltd struck dow...
Income Tax : A perusal of this order reveals that the Tribunal has recorded a finding that it is empowered by Section 254 of the Act to stay pr...
Income Tax : The existing provisions of Section 254(2) provide for a time-limit of four years from the date of the order of the Appellate Tribu...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad rules improper service of notice due to incorrect email address in the case of LMP Motors Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT, highlig...
Income Tax : Kerala High Court restores Cool Mind Technologies' income tax appeal, emphasizing ITAT's obligation to consider appeals on merits ...
Income Tax : The Delhi High Court ruled that once a TPO issues an order, the AO must pass an assessment order per Section 92CA(4) of the Income...
Income Tax : Discover the ITAT Delhi's ruling on Sakshi Fincap Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, addressing valuation discrepancies and retrospective amendmen...
Income Tax : Kerala High Court ruling emphasizes time limits in Income Tax Act assessments on remand. Detailed analysis of Joseph Michael vs. D...
ITAT Delhi’s decision in the case of Sumaitri Bima Distributors Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO regarding non-applicability of S.40(a)(ia) for TDS on salary before AY 2015-16.
The Delhi High Court directs the ITAT to reconsider the exclusion of Onward Technologies Limited (OTL) as a comparable in the transfer pricing study. Detailed analysis and conclusion.
ITAT Delhi held that it is settled principle of law that the disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act cannot exceed the exempt income.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act not leviable since there is no concealment of particulars of income by the assessee.
Bombay High Court held that failure to pass a draft assessment order under section 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act results in rendering the final assessment as one without jurisdiction.
ITAT Mumbai held that amount of compensation for defective product being capital in nature cannot be adjusted from WDV of the assets.
Karnataka High Court held that even if the tax paid is found to be less than that payable, no further demand can be made for recovery of the balance amount when a fresh assessment is barred.
Jharkhand High Court held that once penalty order is set aside, it will be presumed that there is no concealment and hence prosecution under Section 276C(1) of the Income Tax Act will be quashed automatically.
ITAT Mumbai held that revisionary powers under section 263 of the Income Tax Act rightly invoked by PCIT as order of assessing officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.
Dive deep into case of DCIT Vs Suman Solanki, as ITAT Jaipur discusses its authority to rectify mistakes, amendments from Finance Act, 2021, and interpretation of Section 254(2).
