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 : ITAT Mumbai deletes penalty under Section 270A as quantum addition was fully removed. Held that no under-reporting exists when ass...
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 ...
It was held that applying Sections 69/69A read with Section 115BBE without examining penalty under Section 271AAC justified revision. The PCIT’s direction to reframe the assessment was sustained.
The case examined taxability of stamp duty differential in the hands of a housewife joint owner. The Tribunal ruled that absence of financial contribution bars addition under Section 56(2)(vii)(b).
The ITAT ruled that absence of recorded satisfaction in the assessment order bars initiation of penalty under Section 271E. Supervisory revision cannot substitute the Assessing Officer’s statutory discretion.
The Assessing Officer made an ALP adjustment on interest despite the assessee having already added back the full amount under thin capitalization rules. The Tribunal ruled that TP provisions cannot be applied where no expenditure is claimed.
ITAT Pune held that penalty not leviable under section 270A of the Income Tax Act since show cause notice failed to specify the applicable limb u/s. 270A(9) under which the penalty was imposed. Accordingly, penalty is quashed and appeal is allowed.
The Tribunal ruled that Section 14A cannot be invoked where borrowed funds were not used to earn exempt income. Disallowance was deleted after finding investments were made from interest-free funds.
The Tribunal ruled that ad hoc disallowance is unsustainable when books are not rejected. Disallowance was reduced to 8% based on facts and past practice.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of indexed cost of acquisition while computing book profit under section 115JB of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, AO directed to recompute book profit after allowing indexation.
The Tribunal held that reopening based solely on Insight Portal inputs without independent application of mind is invalid. Since the reassessment itself failed, the addition of share LTCG as unexplained income under section 68 could not survive.
The court held that an Assessing Officer must give clear reasons while rejecting an immunity application under Section 270AA. An unreasoned rejection order was found unsustainable and was set aside.
