Income Tax : Learn the updated provisions governing rectification, assessments, reassessments, and appeals under the Income-tax Act. This guide...
CA, CS, CMA : Discover the complexities of tax compliance for freelancers and gig workers, from understanding income sources to navigating legal...
Income Tax : Understand the penalty for failure to furnish income tax return. Learn about the increased late fees and provisions under Section ...
Income Tax : I have covered only relevant compliances/information useful for Small Manufacturer, Traders only through this article which includ...
Income Tax : While filing your income tax return within due date is important, it does not mean that if for any reason you missed the dead line...
Income Tax : The Finance Bill, 2017 proposes to levy fees of Rs.5,000 in case where return is furnished after the due date but on or before 31S...
Income Tax : ITAT ruled that the reassessment order passed under Section 147 was unsustainable as it exceeded the limitation period prescribed ...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that the reassessment notice issued for AY 2015-16 after 31.03.2022 was barred by limitation under the first p...
Income Tax : The Court held that a Section 148 notice issued beyond the statutory six-year limitation period is invalid. It ruled that expired ...
Income Tax : The issue was whether delay in filing appeal without strong documentary proof should be condoned. The ITAT held that when sufficie...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that admitting additional evidence without seeking a remand report from the Assessing Officer breaches Rule 46A...
The issue was whether reassessment becomes invalid when the return is filed on the same day as the assessment order. The Tribunal held that such belated filing cannot nullify a best-judgment reassessment.
Karnataka High Court set aside reassessment and penalty orders where the assessee could not file returns due to inactive email, granting a fresh opportunity to submit documents and pleadings.
Karnataka High Court invalidated reassessment proceedings and related notices for AY 2015-16, holding that actions initiated beyond Section 151A are legally void.
The assessee claimed the firm had dissolved and deposits belonged to a partner. The Tribunal held that absence of documentary proof justified treating bank deposits as unexplained income.
The Tribunal held that CIT(A) misinterpreted a VSVS 2020 declaration for penalty as covering quantum, dismissing the appeal without considering merits. The order was set aside, and the matter remanded for de-novo adjudication. Quantum issues must be assessed independently of VSVS for penalties.
The Bombay High Court held that a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 on 5th April 2022 is barred by limitation, following the Supreme Court’s Rajeev Bansal decision and prior High Court rulings.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that speculative intraday trades are genuine and not accommodation entries. Additions under Section 68 totaling ₹1.25 crore and ₹1.53 lakh were deleted due to lack of foundational facts and proper inquiry.
The ITAT Mumbai deleted Rs. 10.84 crore addition made under Section 68, ruling that the assessee had properly documented loans and repayments. Key takeaway: Genuineness of transactions with third-party entities can neutralize claims of unexplained credits.
ITAT Pune held that late filing of audit report cannot disentitle trust from availing benefit of section 11 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, order of CIT(A) allowing claim of exemption u/s. 11 upheld and appeal of revenue dismissed.
The Tribunal held that the assessee’s income tax return for AY 2013-14 was filed within the permissible time under Section 139. Therefore, the penalty of ₹5,000 imposed under Section 271F was unjustified and was deleted.
