Income Tax : The Central Government, in the Union Budget 2026, has proposed an important amendment concerning employee welfare funds. The objec...
Income Tax : 2023 Income Tax change (Sec 43B(h)) mandates that deductions for payments to Micro and Small Enterprises are allowed only when pai...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court upholds disallowance of delayed PF/ESI contributions under Section 143(1), but permits deductions when the due da...
Income Tax : Practical guide to tax audit under Section 44AB for trader assessees, covering groundwork, data analysis, compliance checks, and f...
Income Tax : Understand Section 43B(h) of the Income Tax Act, MSME classification, payment timelines, tax disallowance, interest on delays, and...
CA, CS, CMA : Explore recent updates on corporate tax rates, MSME concerns over tax deductions, and GST rates for shawls as addressed in Lok Sab...
Income Tax : Punjab Accountants Association urges Finance Minister to amend Section 43(B)(h) for MSMEs, proposing better payment timelines and ...
Income Tax : Discover how proposed amendment in Section 43B of Income Tax Act, 1961, affects MSMEs. Learn about potential challenges and sugges...
Income Tax : Live Webinar with Book on Section 43B(h) (Financial Fitness) on 10th May 2024, 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm. CA Manoj Lamba will break down ...
Income Tax : Explore how the new 43 B (h) clause of the IT Act impacts Kerala Textiles and Garments Dealers Welfare Association and their appea...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that adjustments made without issuing prior notice to the assessee violate the mandatory proviso to Section 143(...
Income Tax : The Court held that electricity duty collected by a licensee is not its own liability but that of consumers. As a result, Section ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai rules actuarial provisions for employee benefit schemes are allowable under Section 37(1) as ascertained liabilities, ...
Income Tax : The Court dismissed the appeal after finding that all issues were already settled by earlier rulings. It held that no new question...
Income Tax : The court held that revision under section 263 requires independent satisfaction by the PCIT. Acting merely on the Assessing Offic...
Income Tax : Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has recently issued a crucial notification concerning the payment of interest on loans to Non...
Corporate Law : Explore how the recent policy update impacts MSMEs and traders regarding delayed payment benefits under the MSMED Act, 2006. Insig...
Income Tax : Disallowances made under sections 32, 40(a)(ia), 40A(3), 43B, etc. of the Act and other specific disallowances, related to the bus...
Income Tax : Income Tax Circular No. 22/2015 W.c.f. 1.4.1988, the settled position is that if the assessee deposits any sum payable by it by wa...
Income Tax : Whether the liability has been deferred or not has to be considered not from the simplistic point of the term 'defer' but in conte...
ITAT held that ₹1.5 Cr advance for a real estate project, which became irrecoverable, qualifies as a trading loss under section 28. The decision reverses AO and CIT(A) disallowances, allowing the loss as a business expense.
The Tribunal condoned a 345-day delay after finding the assessee’s claim of non-receipt of orders plausible. It noted that the AO never sought details for the disputed disallowances and CIT(A) failed to examine documents properly. The matter was remitted for fresh verification, ensuring fair opportunity.
ITAT Visakhapatnam held that addition towards unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Income Tax Act upheld since assessee company failed to substantiate identity and creditworthiness of lender.
The Tribunal found that notices lacking classification as limited, complete, or manual scrutiny violated CBDT instructions. As a result, the assessment under section 143(3) was quashed as void ab initio.
The assessee’s plea that delayed PF/ESI deduction was a debatable issue was rejected because Checkmate had settled the law retrospectively. The key takeaway is that once the Supreme Court clarifies the law, CPC may apply it through 143(1)(a) adjustments based on audit disclosures.
The Tribunal found no evidence of concealment since the assessee had transparently disclosed impairment, CENVAT credit treatment, and revenue recognition. It ruled that Section 271(1)(c) cannot be invoked merely because the AO made additions.
The tribunal held that the State Electricity Board consumer tariff of ₹6.62/unit was the valid internal CUP for captive power transfer. Rejecting comparisons with generating companies, it ruled that no downward adjustment was required. The key takeaway is that actual SEB purchase rates can reliably determine market value for 80IA claims.
The Tribunal held that a captive software development service provider cannot be compared with giant IT companies owning IP, diversified services, and global operations. By excluding these functionally dissimilar comparables, the entire ₹10.58 crore TP adjustment was deleted.
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.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition on account of section 14A of the Income Tax Act while computing books profit under section 115JB of the Income Tax Act is not justifiable. Accordingly, addition u/s. 14A deleted and appeal of assessee allowed.
