Income Tax : This guide explains when penalties can be imposed under various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It also outlines the appli...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that penalty under Section 270A cannot be levied merely because income was estimated after rejection of books. Si...
Income Tax : The article explains how transactions between associated domestic entities exceeding ₹20 crore must comply with arm's length pri...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that non-specification of the precise statutory charge under sections 270A(2) and 270A(9) violated principles o...
Income Tax : Budget 2026 proposes allowing taxpayers to file an updated return even after receiving a reassessment notice under Section 148. Wh...
Income Tax : Explore amendments to section 253 of Income-tax Act, adjusting time limits for filing appeals to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that IT, salary and travel reimbursements without any profit element were not taxable and deleted the disallowance...
Income Tax : ITAT held that an Assessing Officer cannot substitute the DCF method chosen under Rule 11UA with the NAV method without legal just...
Income Tax : ITAT held ₹33 crore settled rights over the entire land, allowing full indexed acquisition cost and rejecting proportionate rest...
Income Tax : ITAT excluded EDCIL, Just Dial, Info Edge and India Exposition Mart as transfer pricing comparables due to functional differences ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that a penalty notice lacking a specific allegation of under-reporting, misreporting, or the applicable clause ...
ITAT Hyderabad held that interest paid on account of delayed remittance of TDS cannot be treated as business expenditure under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, order disallowing the same is upheld.
The ITAT held that additions based on incorrect and unreconciled bank data cannot be sustained. The assessment was remanded for fresh verification of actual cash deposits and credits.
Mumbai ITAT ruled that Section 145A is a valuation provision, not a charging mechanism, and deleted a ₹38.26 lakh MODVAT/CENVAT addition, highlighting that proper accounting and reconciliation prevent artificial income.
The Tribunal reiterated that tax authorities cannot impose notional income merely because interest could have been charged. Commercial decisions on interest-free advances lie with the assessee, not the assessing officer.
The issue was whether payments for supplying in-flight entertainment content constituted royalty. The Tribunal held that mere provision and processing of licensed content without transfer of copyright does not amount to royalty under the India-UK DTAA.
ITAT Indore held that delay of 560 days in filing of an appeal before CIT(A) rightly not condoned as assessee has failed to give satisfactory and bonafide explanation. Accordingly, delay not condoned as no sufficient cause shown.
ITAT Mumbai ruled that ancillary software support services did not constitute FTS under the India–Singapore DTAA, deleting a ₹482.77 crore addition due to failure of the make available test.
The tribunal held that assessments completed through the DRP mechanism remain subject to the outer time limit prescribed under section 153. The key takeaway is that section 144C does not extend or override statutory limitation periods.
The ITAT held that where investments are fully backed by substantial own funds and a rational suo-motu disallowance is made, Rule 8D cannot be mechanically invoked. The Revenue’s attempt to make an additional disallowance was rejected.
The ITAT held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) fails where the notice alleged inaccurate particulars but the levy was based on concealment.
