Income Tax : An overview of Section 144 of the Indian Income Tax Act, which allows an Assessing Officer to make a best judgment assessment in c...
Income Tax : An analysis of Sections 263 and 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It details the conditions, scope, and judicial precedents for the...
Income Tax : The High Court held that once a resolution plan under IBC extinguishes prior tax liabilities, reassessment cannot be initiated. Th...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that delay in filing Form 67 is a procedural lapse. It restored the matter to the AO to verify and allow Foreign...
Income Tax : The tribunal examined whether penalties could continue when the fresh assessment order did not record satisfaction for initiating ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal accepted that the deposits represented funds withdrawn earlier for house construction. Since the explanation was supp...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that where the AO had examined and accepted exemption on interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, ...
The Tribunal held that limitation under Section 153 overrides the DRP timeline under Section 144C. As the assessment was completed beyond the statutory outer limit, it was quashed as invalid.
The Tribunal held that a final assessment passed after the expiry of Section 153 is invalid, even if it follows DRP directions. The is that limitation under Section 153 remains mandatory and cannot be bypassed through the DRP route.
The Tribunal held that the assessee cannot suffer due to the AO’s inaction under section 270AA(4), directing grant of immunity and cancelling the 270A penalty.
The High Court held that the Commissioner did not properly apply the wide discretionary powers under section 264. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration in light of the petitioner’s circumstances and submitted records.
The Kerala High Court held that scrutiny of exempted trust returns was correctly conducted as complete scrutiny, allowing assessment of appropriation of receipts under Section 12A.
ITAT held that most jewellery seized during a search could be accounted for from declared drawings and past income, reducing addition to ₹72.45 lakh. Ruling emphasizes that unexplained investment must be proven in relevant assessment year.
Relying on the Schneider Electric judgment of the Delhi High Court, the ITAT held that absence of a separate immunity order within one month does not justify penalty imposition.
Bombay High Court quashed reassessment proceedings initiated using data from a valid IDS declaration, holding that once accepted under the Income Disclosure Scheme, the Revenue cannot revisit or reassess the same income.
The Karnataka High Court set aside the PCIT’s rejection of a condonation delay application for late online Form 68 filing. The court adopted a justice-oriented view, directing a fresh, liberal reconsideration, as the taxpayer’s manual compliance was timely and the error was bona fide.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi, ruled against the revenue’s additions of unaccounted capitation fees and cash loan interest under Sections 69A and 69C against the Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust.
