Income Tax : Understand the impact of Section 43B(h) on businesses: Learn about deductions for MSME payments and the importance of timely payme...
Income Tax : Explore the impact of Finance Act, 2023, on MSME payment enforcement under section 43B(h) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Understand ...
Income Tax : Explore the implications of the recent Income Tax amendment to Section 43B affecting MSMEs. Understand how timely payments are cru...
Income Tax : Explore key income tax compliance requirements for charitable and educational institutions under the Income Tax Act for the assess...
Income Tax : Discover simplified taxation scheme under Section 44AD of Income Tax Act. Learn eligibility criteria, exemptions, and key insights...
Income Tax : The ITAT Bangalore ruled that income tax additions can't be based solely on unsubstantiated loose slips, emphasizing the need for ...
Income Tax : ITAT held that time limit for filing rectification applications starts only when assessee is aware of order passed, not from date ...
Income Tax : Analysis of Om Prakash Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi) case reveals PCIT's jurisdiction limitations on tax issues under Land Acquisition Act ...
Income Tax : Explore the detailed analysis of Jai Parkash Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi) case where the assessment jurisdiction dispute regarding interes...
Goods and Services Tax : Allahabad High Court held that penalty under Section 54(1)(2) of the U.P. VAT Act, 2008 cannot be imposed in cases, wherein, the a...
The ITAT Bangalore ruled that income tax additions can’t be based solely on unsubstantiated loose slips, emphasizing the need for corroborative material evidence.
ITAT held that time limit for filing rectification applications starts only when assessee is aware of order passed, not from date of order itself. Since there was no proof of intimation being served on assessee, time-barred argument by tax authorities was dismissed.
Analysis of Om Prakash Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi) case reveals PCIT’s jurisdiction limitations on tax issues under Land Acquisition Act Section 28.
Explore the detailed analysis of Jai Parkash Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi) case where the assessment jurisdiction dispute regarding interest received under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act was resolved.
Allahabad High Court held that penalty under Section 54(1)(2) of the U.P. VAT Act, 2008 cannot be imposed in cases, wherein, the assessment is made on the basis of Best Judgement Assessment.
In PCIT vs Inderjit Singh Sodhi (HUF), Delhi High Court examines whether interest on compensation is taxable as income from other sources. Read the detailed analysis.
Mahaveer NX challenges a customs order citing address discrepancy & lack of hearing. Madras HC sets it aside, directing issuance of SCN for correction.
Madras High Court held that non-fulfilling obligation under advance license by the transferor doesn’t get extinguish on account of merger/ amalgamation. Such liability has to be discharged by the transferee company.
Authority / power to revoke or cancel the Discharge Certificate on the premise that the material particulars furnished in the Discharge Certificate was false, lied with the exclusive jurisdiction of the Designated Committee.
Supreme Court held that provisions of section 71 of the Customs Act doesn’t apply when goods were not warehoused inside the notified public bonded warehouse but were unloaded outside the notified area but within factory premises and kept under a shed on permission granted by Superintended.
