Income Tax : The Income Tax Act, 2025 introduces Section 58, consolidating earlier presumptive taxation schemes into one unified framework. It ...
Income Tax : The tribunal ruled that business income under section 44AD cannot be taxed using section 44ADA provisions. Presumptive schemes mus...
CA, CS, CMA : The calendar lists all major statutory deadlines across laws. It helps businesses track filings and avoid penalties through timely...
Income Tax : Only specified professionals can opt for presumptive taxation under Section 44ADA. Declaring less than 50% profit may trigger mand...
Income Tax : Section 44AA mandates maintenance of books of accounts by specified professionals and businesses exceeding prescribed limits. Lear...
CA, CS, CMA : The ICAI has updated guidelines for tax audit limits, retaining a 60-audit cap per member per financial year. The rule is effectiv...
Income Tax : Join our 5-day live course from Sept 8-12, 2024, for an in-depth understanding of tax audits under Section 44AB, with practical in...
Income Tax : Join our live course from Aug 23-25, 2024, to master tax audits, including Form 3CD, financial statements, and GST, with practical...
Income Tax : Exposure Draft of Revised ‘Guidance Note on Tax Audit under section 44AB of Income-tax Act, 1961’ is issued by ICAI Direct Tax...
Income Tax : Representation for extension of Due date of Income Tax Returns And Audit Report For A.Y. 2021-2022 (F.Y. 2020-2021. It is reques...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that interest expenses cannot be disallowed when the trust merely facilitates transactions and costs are reimbur...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad holds that Section 249(4)(b) cannot bar appeal where no income is admitted and no advance tax is payable; sets asid...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that mere suspicion of bogus transactions without supporting evidence cannot justify addition under section 68. ...
Income Tax : The issue revolved around expansion of scrutiny from cash deposits to entire bank credits. The Tribunal ruled that such expansion ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that unsigned excel sheets without supporting evidence cannot justify additions. It ruled that absence of corrob...
Income Tax : The amendments brought about by Notification No. 45/2023 – Income-Tax (Income-tax (Eleventh Amendment) Rules, 2023) encompas...
Income Tax : Notification No. 8/2020-Income-Tax- CBDT has notified Other electronic modes by inserting New Income TAx Rule 6ABBA. It also amend...
Income Tax : In compliance to the judgments of various High Courts and after considering the representations received for extension of the due ...
Income Tax : Notification No. 33/2014-Income Tax S.O. 1902 (E).. In exercise of the powers conferred by section 295 read with section 44AB of t...
The Tribunal held that receipts already offered under the presumptive scheme cannot be taxed again as unexplained money. Once income is declared under section 44AD and supported by surrounding facts, section 69A has no application.
Addressing alleged cash discrepancies and debtor recoveries, the Tribunal held that such amounts form part of presumptive business receipts. Without books or adverse evidence, additions were unjustified.
The dispute concerned treatment of frequent cash deposits collected from customers for recharge services. The Tribunal affirmed that income should be estimated at 8% where records and compliance were lacking.
The issue was whether reassessment can proceed without furnishing recorded reasons despite a taxpayers request. The Tribunal held that failure to supply reasons is a jurisdictional defect that invalidates reassessment.
The dispute centered on profit estimation after reopening for suppressed turnover. The Tribunal affirmed lower NP for animal sales, recognising industry norms and assessee history. The ruling underscores tailoring estimates to trade economics.
The issue was whether a trader declaring income under Section 44AD could face additions for unexplained cash deposits. The Tribunal ruled in favour of the assessee, holding such additions contrary to law.
The issue was whether entire cash deposits and unsecured loans could be taxed as unexplained income. The Tribunal held that only the embedded profit is taxable and restricted the addition to 10%.
The dispute involved taxability of large cash deposits made during demonetisation. The appellate authority granted relief for deposits in regular notes while sustaining the balance as unexplained income. The Tribunal upheld this approach, finding it consistent with law and facts.
The Tribunal held that additions treating shooting location receipts as house property income were premature. Authorities were directed to re-examine the claim after considering all relevant documents.
The Tribunal held that estimating business income at 10% of turnover without citing comparable cases or industry benchmarks is unsustainable. Arbitrary profit estimation must be supported by material evidence.
