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 : A remedy by way of appeal from the orders of ITAT is provided both u/s.260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and u/s.15 (w.e.f. 6-1- 20...
Income Tax : PCIT Vs Farmson Pharmaceuticals Gujarat Pvt Ltd (Gujarat High Court): Reassessment cannot be solely based on a reevaluation of exi...
Income Tax : Explore the case of Pipelic Energy Software India Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT at Telangana High Court. Detailed analysis on why subsidiary exp...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court allows income tax deduction for payment clearing mortgage, dismissing Revenue’s appeal under section 263. Ful...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court ruled on N H Kapadia Education Trust vs ACIT, addressing the corpus donation eligibility for exemption under Se...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court dismisses Revenue’s appeal in CIT Vs Joshi Technologies, allowing additional depreciation on oil wells u/s 32...
DGFT : All conditions in policy circular no 15 of 1st February 2011 will continue to apply, except the specification about dates and the ...
Assessee can’t be obstructed from availing of the benefits of the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVSV Act) even where the time limit for an appeal had not expired as DTVSV Act aspired to finally free the tax arrears locked in the litigation combat for ages and ultimately ensures timely collection of tax.
In PCIT Vs Mahabir Jute Mills Lts., the Allahabad High Court ruled that if books of accounts are not objected to, the AO cannot disturb gross profit rates. Detailed analysis here.
Whether addition made by Assessing Officer under Section 68 was justified, particularly in light of non-response from directors to notices.
Assessee had miserably failed to establish genuineness of the transaction by cogent and credible evidence and that the investments made in its share capital were genuine.
Bombay High Court ruling favors Tata Steel, allowing its Rs. 212.52 crores contribution to Compensatory Afforestation Fund as revenue expenditure, dismissing IT department’s appeal.
Department argued that it had not received the ITAT’s order through proper channels, thus absolving itself of responsibility. However, the court rejected this argument, emphasizing that once the Department became aware of the ITAT’s order, it was obligated to comply within the stipulated time frame.
Bombay High Court ruling: Assessing Officer (AO) must record dissatisfaction with Assessee’s claim regarding expenditure. Detailed analysis of PCIT-2 Vs Tata Capital Ltd case.
In the case of ITO Vs Raj Maitry & Eskon Developer, ITAT Mumbai decides advance received from customers isn’t income under section 68. Detailed analysis of the ruling.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as assessee has established the genuineness of purchase and sale of shares by producing documentary evidence and transaction of purchase and sale of shares is done via banking channel.
Delhi High Court dismisses Revenue’s appeal, ruling photocopy of sale agreement insufficient evidence for income addition. Analysis & judgment explained.
