Income Tax : Understand the three core processes of Indian Income Tax: Rectification of mistakes (Sec 154), the four types of Assessment (Summa...
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 : 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...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that penalty for non-response to notices cannot survive when the assessee later participates in the assessment ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal observed that when a foundational jurisdictional issue exists, dismissal on limitation without examining merits is un...
Read the detailed analysis of the ITAT Chennai order in the case of D. Ramagopal Vs ACIT, where addition was upheld due to failure in proving the genuinity of income from agriculture activities.
ITAT Chennai deletes Rs. 16.8 lakhs addition, finding no evidence to prove properties sold by taxpayer were agricultural land in D. Ramagopal Vs ACIT case.
ITAT Ahmedabad quashes penalties under Section 271(1)(b) & 271F of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing that income determination in assessment orders cannot dictate filing of ITRs.
Indore ITAT clarifies that a firm can’t deny land ownership if bought through directors. Read the detailed analysis of Bagora Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT case.
Read the detailed analysis of Amey Pravinbhai Brahmbhatt Vs ITO case where ITAT Ahmedabad deleted the penalty under section 271A for failure to fulfill conditions u/s 44 AA of Income Tax Act.
ITAT Delhi held that disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act on merely estimating that more income should have been earned from sub-contracting without bringing any comparable figures is unsustainable in law.
Delhi High Court nullifies penalty notice for Darpan Kohli, as the preceding assessment order was negated by the same court. Explore the full judgment.
ITAT Jaipur lifts penalty for Mukesh Pathaks late ITR filing, deeming it a bona fide mistake with no revenue loss as proper tax was already paid.
The ITAT Delhi quashes the penalty imposed under Section 271F against an 82-year-old widow for non-filing of Income Tax Return (ITR) as she had no taxable income.
ITAT Bangalore held that pre-clinical laboratory services rendered by the assessee (non-resident) to its customers in India would not be chargeable to tax in India as the technical services rendered by the affiliates do not “make available” technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how or process while preparing these reports for their, Indian customers/ clients.
