Income Tax : Budget 2026 proposes allowing taxpayers to file an updated return even after receiving a reassessment notice under Section 148. Wh...
Income Tax : Misreporting under Section 270A(9) applies only to six specific circumstances. Where the assessment order does not clearly establi...
Income Tax : The law now proposes a single consolidated assessment-cum-penalty order for under-reporting of income, reducing multiple proceedin...
Income Tax : Detailed overview of penalties under various sections of the Income Tax Act, covering defaults in tax payment, reporting, document...
Income Tax : Section 270A penalties must specify the exact misreporting clause. Vague notices invalidate penalties and can restore immunity und...
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 : The tribunal examined whether duty drawback should be taxed on accrual or actual receipt. It held that as per law, duty drawback i...
Income Tax : ITAT held that interest earned on bank deposits is taxable and not covered by the principle of mutuality. The ruling confirms that...
Income Tax : The Tribunal restored the penalty matter as the quantum addition was sent back to the AO. It held that penalty must follow the out...
Income Tax : The issue was penalty for misreporting on sale of land classified as capital asset. The Tribunal held the issue was debatable and ...
Income Tax : The case examined whether disallowance under section 94(7) should be limited to exempt dividend. The Tribunal held that the provis...
ITAT Delhi held that bona fide error cannot be basis of imposition of penalty and hence imposition of penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act rightly deleted by First Appellate Authority.
ITAT Bangalore held that imposition of penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act on account of underreporting of income not justified as failing to furnish income tax return was bona fide.
ITAT Delhi rules Coursera’s income from Indian customers not taxable as Fees for Technical Services (FTS) under India-USA DTAA. A key decision for online platforms.
ITAT Delhi held that routine support services would not be taxable as Fees for Technical Services (FTS) in terms of the provisions of India-UK Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA).
ITAT Delhi held that cost to cost reimbursement on account of secondment of employees cannot be treated as Fees for Technical Services (FTS) as defined under Article 12 of India USA-DTAA. Thus, appeal of the assessee allowed.
ITAT Raipur held that law will help only those who are vigilant and will not assist the one who are careless. Accordingly, request of assessee to restore matter back not granted as assessee has chosen not to represent its matter for more than 08 years.
Amount received as reimbursements for expenses related to software subscription services should not be taxed as technical services income under Article 12 of the of the India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ( DTAA ) or Section 9(1)(vii).
ITAT Delhi ruled that penalties for income misreporting cannot be imposed if there’s no malafide intention. Pranav Vikas India Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT.
ITAT Delhi held that the condition of make available was not satisfied for services when provided by assessee did not enabled the AEs to apply the technology independently. Thus, technical service provided to AEs not taxable.
Learn about Section 270A introduced in Finance Act 2016, effective from April 1, 2017, outlining penalties for under-reporting and misreporting of income.
