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 : Calcutta HC dismissed the Revenue's appeal after the remand report confirmed the disputed receipt was sale proceeds of investments...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court ruled that expenditure cannot be disallowed under Section 14A unless exempt income is actually earned in the rele...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held that non-compliance with Section 144B raised a jurisdictional issue requiring ITAT adjudication and set asi...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court upheld deletion of the Section 271D penalty, holding that absence of recorded satisfaction in the assessment or...
Income Tax : The High Court declined to examine bogus purchase issues after holding the Revenue's appeal not maintainable due to low tax effect...
DGFT : All conditions in policy circular no 15 of 1st February 2011 will continue to apply, except the specification about dates and the ...
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.
ITAT Bangalore held that assets received for testing purpose and there is no specific benefit that arises to the assessee with respect to usage of those assets, the same is not taxable under section 28(iv) of the Income tax Act. Accordingly, appeal of assessee allowed.
The High Court dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, affirming that the assessee discharged the initial onus under Section 68 by proving the lender’s identity and creditworthiness via banking channels and subsequent repayment with interest. It was held that doubts regarding the lender’s own creditors are irrelevant for the assessee’s assessment prior to the 2022 amendment, provided the primary transaction is genuine.
