Income Tax : The issue is when High Courts can entertain appeals against ITAT orders. The key takeaway is that only debatable, material legal q...
Income Tax : Supreme Court disallows ₹10 crore bad debt deduction for Khyati Realtors Pvt Ltd, ruling it as capital expenditure, not eligible...
Income Tax : Explore remedies for taxpayers under the Income Tax Act, 1961, comparing appeals & revisions. Understand procedures, limitations &...
Income Tax : On commencement of regular assessment proceedings u/s 143(2) of Act , there is no need for intimation u/s 143(1)(a)(i) Where the s...
Income Tax : Substantial question of Law (SQL). On interpretation of section 260A of the Income Tax Act , 1961 and section 100 of the code of c...
Income Tax : Madras High Court held that time-share membership fees could not be fully taxed in the year of receipt since the assessee had cont...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled in favour of the assessee after noting that audited financials, PAN, bank statements, ITRs, confirmations, and ...
Income Tax : The Hyderabad ITAT held that only the actual period lost during the limitation period can be excluded under Explanation-1 to Secti...
Income Tax : The High Court ruled that reopening under Sections 147 and 148 was unsustainable because the Assessing Officer’s reasons amounte...
Income Tax : The Delhi High Court held that shareholders of a foreign company cannot be taxed on the company’s rental income and capital gain...
DGFT : All conditions in policy circular no 15 of 1st February 2011 will continue to apply, except the specification about dates and the ...
The court upheld the Tribunal’s view that the AO had examined salary and business promotion expenses, making Section 263 revision invalid. It held that when two views are possible, revisional interference is unwarranted.
The Court held that the approval granted for multiple search assessments was issued in a consolidated, mechanical form without case-specific consideration. It noted that Section 153D requires meaningful application of mind, which was absent in the approval examined by the Tribunal. The appeals were dismissed as no substantial question of law arose.
Court rules that statements recorded under Section 133A during survey proceedings have no evidentiary value, invalidating additions for excess stock and cash.
The Court held that the Tribunal erred by rejecting an adjournment request without assigning reasons. The matter was remanded for a fresh hearing after finding a violation of natural justice.
Telangana High Court held that sale of undertaking as a going concern falls within the definition of a slump sale as set out in Section 2(42C) of the Income Tax Act hence section 41(2) dealing with taxation of gains on sale of certain depreciable assets doesn’t apply.
The Calcutta High Court dismissed the revenue’s appeal against the ITAT, holding that the assessee properly identified shareholders and explained the share premium, making Section 68 inapplicable. The ruling confirms that proper documentation can prevent share capital additions.
ITAT held that additions under section 153A cannot be made if no incriminating material is found at the assessee’s premises; third-party documents should be invoked via section 153C.
The Bombay High Court ruled that the CIT cannot exercise revision powers under Section 263 when the Assessing Officer has verified the identity, source, and creditworthiness of foreign donors and satisfied with gifts received.
Gujarat High Court upheld the deletion of a Section 271D penalty, ruling that the assessment order did not record satisfaction for initiating proceedings. No substantial question of law was found, and the appeal was dismissed.
The Court held that interest and related receipts must be treated as business income, not income from other sources. The Tribunal’s order was upheld as no substantial question of law arose.
