No Penalty on Wife for Non-Disclosure of Joint Foreign Investment When Husband Declares in ITR: PCIT v. Aditi Avinash Athavankar (Bom. HC, 2025)

Author
My Tax Expert
01/01/2026  |  0 COMMENTS  |  VISITOR'S COUNT: 493
Read More »
For Assessment Year 2017-18, the allegation against the respondent-assessee (wife) pertained to non-disclosure of a foreign investment in Schedule FA of her income tax return. The material on record indicated that her na...

Prosecution under Section 276C(2) Quashed for Delayed Self-Assessment Tax: No Willful Evasion Established – Vilas Babanrao Kalokhe v. PCIT (Central) [2025]

Author
My Tax Expert
31/12/2025  |  0 COMMENTS  |  VISITOR'S COUNT: 528
Read More »
The assessee, engaged in stone crushing and manufacturing of precast cement pipes, filed the return of income for AY 2022-23 on 05.11.2022. The self-assessment tax payable under Section 140A was not discharged along with...

No Penalty for Non-Disclosure of Joint Foreign Investment When Husband Declared It: PCIT v. Aditi Avinash Athavankar (2025) – Discretion under Black Money Act Upheld

Author
My Tax Expert
31/12/2025  |  0 COMMENTS  |  VISITOR'S COUNT: 506
Read More »
No penalty on wife for not disclosing foreign investment if husband duly declared it in his ITR For assessment year 2017-2018, the allegation against the respondent–assessee (wife) was non-disclosure of a foreign inve...

Reassessment Limitation under New Regime: Allahabad High Court in Dinesh Jain v. Union of India Applies Rajeev Bansal (SC) to Quash Time-Barred AY 2016-17 Notice

Author
CA. Atul Agrawal, Former Vice Chairman CIRC
31/12/2025  |  0 COMMENTS  |  VISITOR'S COUNT: 546
Read More »
Reassessment Limitation under the New Regime: Hon’ble Allahabad High Court’s First Pronouncement on the issueIn Dinesh Jain v. Union of India, the Hon’ble Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court has examined the...

Interest u/s 220(2) Not Leviable Before Fresh Section 156 Demand Notice: ITAT Mumbai in Samsara Shipping (P) Ltd. v. ITO [TS-1710-ITAT-2025(Mum)]

Author
CA. NITIN KANWAR
29/12/2025  |  0 COMMENTS  |  VISITOR'S COUNT: 475
Read More »
Levy of interest under section 220(2) for period prior to fresh demand notice under section 156, unsustainable Mumbai ITAT allows Assessee’s appeal observing that the levy of interest under section 220(2) in the prese...

No Tax on Trust with Overall Deficit Even if Activities Alleged Commercial: ITAT Mumbai in The Mysore Association Bombay v. ITO [TS-1713-ITAT-2025(Mum)]

Author
My Tax Expert
29/12/2025  |  0 COMMENTS  |  VISITOR'S COUNT: 412
Read More »
No tax on Trust with overall deficit even if activity alleged to be commercialAssessee trust is registered under section 12A of the Act and filed its return of income declaring total income at Nil claiming exemption unde...

Bombay HC Quashes Assessment for Granting Only 3 Days to Respond: Minimum 7-Day Response to SCN Mandatory as per CBDT SOP in Dhiraj Lakhamshi Shah v. NFAC (AY 2020-21)

Author
CA. NITIN KANWAR
28/12/2025  |  0 COMMENTS  |  VISITOR'S COUNT: 1653
Read More »
Mumbai High Court holds that assessment order passed with only three days’ response time to show cause notice issued under Section 144B(6)(xvi) violates natural justice and is liable to be quashed notwithstanding time-...

Levy of Interest u/s 220(2) Held Invalid Prior to Fresh Demand Notice u/s 156: ITAT Mumbai in Samsara Shipping (P) Ltd. v. ITO (AY 2021-22)

Author
My Tax Expert
28/12/2025  |  0 COMMENTS  |  VISITOR'S COUNT: 781
Read More »
Mumbai ITAT allows Assessee’s appeal observing that the levy of interest under section 220(2) in the present case is impermissible in terms of statutory provisions; Highlighting that in the demand notice under section ...

Government Rehabilitation Subsidy Held Capital Receipt: Purpose Test Applied | Dharmapuri District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Ltd. v. DCIT (Madras HC, 2025)

Author
My Tax Expert
27/12/2025  |  0 COMMENTS  |  VISITOR'S COUNT: 839
Read More »
Government subsidy under rehabilitation scheme, a capital receipt not revenue receipt; Purpose test to be appliedFor the assessment year 2007-08, the appellant filed its return of income admitting a loss of Rs. 58,46,770...

Vocational Training as ‘Education’ under Section 2(15): Karnataka HC Allows Section 11 Exemption Despite Surplus | Deshpande Education Trust v. ACIT (2025)

Author
My Tax Expert
27/12/2025  |  0 COMMENTS  |  VISITOR'S COUNT: 864
Read More »
Vocational training for rural youth qualifies as ‘education’ under section 2(15); Surplus generation no bar to exemption under section 11. The appellant is a registered trust under Section 12AA of the Act engaged in...