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 Jodhpur held that if the books of accounts are rejected, and net profit is estimated by application of net profit rate, there cannot be again addition on account of any disallowance based on the same set of books of accounts. Thus, addition u/s. 40(a)(ia) set aside.
Read the full text of the ITAT Bangalore order in the DACSS Granites Pvt. Ltd. case. The tribunal rules that immunity under Section 270AA(2) cannot be denied due to a belated Form-68 application.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that services do not qualify as Fee for Technical Services [FTS] under India-Netherlands tax treaty since department failed to demonstrate that technology was ‘make available’ to recipient of services.
Assessee was entitled for exemption under section 10(10B) for Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) compensation on whole of the amount received citing that the Central-Government approved schemes that benefited Employees.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that non-compliance to notices issued u/s. 250 by CIT(A) resulted into delayed appellate proceedings. Accordingly, cost of Rs. 5,000 imposed on the assessee for lack of diligence.
ITAT Kolkata held that condonation of delay in filing of an appeal is liable to be allowed as sufficient cause shown. Accordingly, order of CIT(A) set aside and matter restored back for fresh adjudication.
Before ITAT it was submitted that AO determined the total income/revised income as Rs.12,84,93,150/-. Thus the assessed income is lesser than the returned income of Rs.13.30 crores.
Hire charges of a vessel did not constitute ‘Royalty’ as it was in the nature of business income and as there was no Permanent Establishment therefore, no taxability arose on account of business income.
ITAT Mumbai held that the Employee Stock Option Plans [ESOP] expenses should not be regarded contingent or notional and it should be allowed as deduction u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chennai held that notice u/s 274 r.w.s.270A of the Act was not a valid notice for the reason that the AO did not specify the satisfaction as to whether assessee had either ‘under reported the income or ‘misreported the income’.
