The Tribunal held that exemption under Section 13A does not automatically relieve the payer from deducting TDS on interest paid to political parties. It found the earlier High Court ruling relied upon ...

ITAT ruled that reopening assessment under Section 147 is invalid if the filed return is ignored. The case was remitted for fresh consideration after allowing the assessee to substantiate claims under ...

ITAT Hyderabad held that verifying documents of only one party cannot substitute verification of all transactions under Section 69C. The matter is remanded to the AO for de novo scrutiny of purchase ...

ITAT held that an appeal delayed by almost six years must not be dismissed outright without examining genuine hardships. Medical evidence of the assessee’s child justified potential condonation of ...

ITAT held that sending hearing notices to a wrong email ID violated natural justice. The ex-parte order was set aside, and the matter remitted for fresh ...

Discover how identifying errors in Assessing Officer jurisdiction, notice issuance, and approval under Sections 148/148A can secure favorable ITAT/CIT(A) rulings. Learn key strategies to challenge ...

Sikkim HC ruled that non-banking cooperative societies can claim deductions on interest income from cooperative banks, reversing ITAT’s misinterpretation of section ...

The court held that a VAT assessment without serving the required Form-25 notice is void, and any recovery made is unlawful. Tax authorities must ensure proper communication to enforce ...

The Tribunal emphasized that even pending SLPs cannot override the statutory 10-year limitation for assessments. Revenue’s attempt to reopen AY 2010-11 under Section 153A was rejected, upholding the ...

The 2025 amendment raises the thresholds for small companies, allowing more private firms to benefit from reduced regulatory requirements and simplified ...

The Tribunal held that CIT(A) misinterpreted a VSVS 2020 declaration for penalty as covering quantum, dismissing the appeal ...

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) acted inconsistently by condoning delay in the quantum appeal but refusing the same in penalty appeals. Since sufficient cause existed and was already recognized, ...