Income Tax : Section 292B is considered as a protection to the Income tax authorities for most of short comings in proceedings due to technical...
Income Tax : Our focus of the article will be on section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) which has been introduced with effect from 01.0...
Income Tax : It is noticed that the department has lost the revenue in number of cases mainly on account of fatal mistake made by the AO in iss...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai quashed reassessment after finding no Section 143(2) notice and that the AO issued a final order disguised as a draft ...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that an assessment order passed in the name of an amalgamated bank after it had ceased to exist is void ab ini...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that consolidated approvals granted without application of mind under Section 153D were invalid. Consequently, the...
Income Tax : Mumbai ITAT held that an order labelled as a draft assessment order loses its character if accompanied by demand notices and penal...
Income Tax : The Delhi ITAT held that unsigned reasons recorded for reopening assessment constituted a jurisdictional defect that invalidated t...
The Delhi High Court held that a draft assessment order issued against a company that had ceased to exist due to amalgamation is invalid. Such proceedings suffer from a substantive jurisdictional defect.
The court set aside a rectification order passed without a DIN and beyond the statutory time limit. The ruling underscores that non-compliance with CBDT DIN rules renders such orders invalid.
ITAT Cochin held that since loans and advances are denominated in foreign currency, LIBOR Rates would be more suitable for benchmarking. Accordingly, AO directed to benchmark the international transaction of loan/advances to Associated Enterprise using applicable LIBOR Rate.
The ITAT invalidated an assessment for AY 2008-09 after the AO failed to issue a mandatory draft order under section 144C during remand proceedings, highlighting procedural compliance in transfer pricing cases.
Tribunal held that an unsigned 143(2) notice violates Section 282A(1), making reassessment void. Ruling confirms that signature is mandatory and cannot be cured under Section 292B.
The ITAT held that reassessment notices under section 148 issued to a deceased person are invalid, emphasizing that such notices cannot confer jurisdiction and proceedings are void ab initio.
ITAT Chennai ruled that an assessment order issued without a Document Identification Number violates CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 and is invalid. Tribunal held that non-compliance with circular’s mandate cannot be cured by later communication of DIN. Orders lacking DIN are deemed never to have been issued.
ITAT Mumbai deleted a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) because the notice failed to specify whether it targeted concealment of income or inaccurate particulars. The ruling highlights the need for clarity in issuing tax penalties.
Bombay High Court quashed reassessment notices and order for AY 2018 19 after finding they were issued to a deceased individual, explaining that jurisdiction requires serving a living person.
ITAT Delhi upheld deletion of additions under Section 68 after the assessee proved identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of lenders. Interest disallowance was also deleted as loans were repaid and taxed transactions verified.
