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 ...
ITAT Chennai quashes assessment because the notice u/s 143(2) was issued by a non-jurisdictional AO after jurisdiction transfer u/s 127 was effective. Jurisdictional error is fatal; entire assessment declared void ab initio.
Read the ITAT’s order on the validity of share capital additions under the pre-amendment Section 68 for AY 2012-13. The ruling confirms that the Revenue must conduct thorough inquiries beyond mere non-service of summons to creditors.
Chhattisgarh High Court held that addition on account of unaccounted sales based on estimated production yield in complete absence of any adverse material is rightly deleted. Accordingly, substantial question is answered in favour of assessee.
Gujarat High Court held that provisions of Section 13 of the Income Tax Act can be invoked only at the time of assessment and not at the time of grant of registration under Section 12A of the Act. Accordingly, writ disposed as devoid of merits.
Delhi HC held that indexation benefit on Long Term Capital Gain for flat sale begins only from the date Builder Buyer Agreement is signed & not from Provisional Allotment Date
Karnataka High Court held that no incriminating material was found during the search proceedings and therefore no reassessment of income for the relevant assessment year could be made under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Delhi High Court held that addition of demonetization cash deposit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained cash credit rightly deleted by CIT(A) since source of deposit duly explained with documentary evidence. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
High Court held that the Revenue itself had accepted the provision in earlier years and not disputed it even before the jurisdictional High Court in appeal for AY 2009-10. Since the provision was scientific and actually discharged, no substantial question of law arose.
Telangana High Court held that income earned from production of hybrid seeds under supervision of company is in the nature of agricultural activity and income earned from such activity is exempt under section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Gujarat High Court held that claim of exemption of Long Term Capital Gain under section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act cannot be held to be bogus on the basis of presumption in absence of any corroborative evidence. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
