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 : 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 : Explore amendments to section 253 of Income-tax Act, adjusting time limits for filing appeals to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal...
Income Tax : The ITAT observed that mere remote access to customer-owned systems does not satisfy the disposal and permanence tests required fo...
Income Tax : The Delhi ITAT held that penalty proceedings under Section 270A are invalid when the Assessing Officer does not identify the preci...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that the use of the word may in Section 271AAC gives discretionary power to the Assessing Officer and does not ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that mere disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 80GGC does not automatically amount to misreporting of...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that once the income disclosed in the return filed under Section 148 was accepted without any addition, there co...
ITAT Delhi held that receipts from disaster recovery playout services and disaster recovery up-linking services are not in the nature of Fee for Technical Service (FTS) as envisaged under Article 12(4)(a) of India-Singapore DTAA.
ITAT Pune held that penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act duly leviable in absence of any plausible legal explanation with regard to misreporting of taxable income and increasing deductions.
ITAT Mumbai held that where assessee company was amalgamated with another company and thereby lost its existence, assessment order passed subsequently in name of said non-existing entity, would be without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside.
ITAT Mumbai held that TPO rightly treated interest receivables as a loan outstanding given by assessee to its Associated Enterprises (AE) and charging interest on the same.
ITAT Pune held that imposition of penalty under section 270A(9) of the Income Tax Act without specifying the limb within which the penalty is imposed is unsustainable. Failure of AO to quote any of the six sub-limbs as prescribed u/s 270A(9) makes imposition of penalty unsustainable
ITAT Mumbai held that the bank guarantee rates cannot be considered for benchmarking corporate guarantee fees, therefore benchmarking of AO and DRP is also incorrect. It depends on creditworthiness of parties and benefit arising out of the same in the hands of the parties to the transaction.
Explore our in-depth analysis of the recent ITAT Bangalore ruling on Veereshayya Angadi Vs ITO case, focusing on the issue of penalty for excessive refund claims influenced by a tax consultant.
Bombay High Court held that as per clause (xiii) of section 144B(1), reply can be filed by the assessee on the date and time as specified or within the extended time. Accordingly, shutting down the window before completion of extended time limit is unjustified. Hence, assessment order liable to be quashed.
ITAT Mumbai held that determination of Arm’s Length Price (ALP) of intra group services at Rs. Nil is not justified as the assessee has maintained a reasonably sound documentation of intra group services.
Analyzing ITAT Chennai’s decision in the S. Saroja Vs DCIT case, focusing on the ruling that no penalty should be levied for inadvertent mistakes in reporting house property value by an accountant.
