Income Tax : The Tribunal held that CIT(A) cannot enhance income under Section 251 on matters not considered by the Assessing Officer during as...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that revisional powers under Section 263 cannot be exercised when the Assessing Officer has already examined the iss...
Income Tax : ITAT quashed PCIT’s Section 263 order, holding AO’s treatment of survey income as business income valid and not erroneous or p...
Income Tax : Ahmedabad ITAT quashes reassessments based on ACB report, ruling the AO lacked independent "reason to believe" and only used borro...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune upholds PCIT's order u/s 263, setting aside an assessment for failure to verify ₹82.64 crore in advances for property...
Income Tax : National Chamber of Industries & Commerce, U.P has made a representation against Indiscriminate notices by the Income Tax Depa...
Income Tax : KSCAA has made a Representation on Challenges in Income Tax Related to Rectification Proceedings, Order Giving Effect, Delay in P...
Income Tax : One of the key sources of dispute is the existing arrangement for follow up on audit objections by Internal Audit Party and the Re...
Income Tax : The ITAT Amritsar held that a valuation report by itself cannot justify addition under Section 69 without evidence of extra paymen...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that amortization of BOT road project expenditure must be computed based on the actual concession period and not ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that the reassessment order could not be revised under Section 263 since the conditions for treating jewellery e...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that assessment orders passed pursuant to earlier remand directions were barred by limitation under Section 15...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT held that an Assessing Officer cannot make additions beyond the specific issues remanded by the Principal Commissioner ...
The Tribunal held that revision under Section 263 is invalid where the Assessing Officer has conducted enquiries and adopted a plausible view. Mere disagreement by the Commissioner does not render the assessment order erroneous.
It was held that applying Sections 69/69A read with Section 115BBE without examining penalty under Section 271AAC justified revision. The PCIT’s direction to reframe the assessment was sustained.
The ITAT ruled that absence of recorded satisfaction in the assessment order bars initiation of penalty under Section 271E. Supervisory revision cannot substitute the Assessing Officer’s statutory discretion.
The Tribunal held that revision under Section 263 cannot be triggered merely on the Assessing Officers recommendation. Independent examination and satisfaction of the Commissioner is a mandatory legal requirement.
Alleged additions for suppressed sales, disallowances, and capital gains were rendered void once the revision order was quashed. The case underscores the doctrine of consequential invalidity.
Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act was held outside the scope of Section 10(37). The Tribunal clarified that only compensation qualifies for exemption, not interest.
The Tribunal held that the first appellate authority has a statutory duty to decide grounds on merits and cannot dismiss them as not adjudicated for want of details. Orders violating sections 250(6) and 251(1) were set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that once a Section 263 revision is set aside, the consequential assessment has no legal existence. All proceedings based on such assessment automatically collapse.
The Tribunal held that a protective addition cannot be termed erroneous when the same income has already been assessed substantively in another case. The twin conditions of error and prejudice under section 263 were not satisfied.
ITAT Delhi held that cash deposits during demonetisation were fully explained by cash sales recorded in regular books. When books are not rejected and sales are accepted, separate addition is unsustainable.
