Income Tax Reassessment Notice Generated On Last Day Of Limitation But Uploaded Next Day Due To Portal Glitch Is Time-Barred: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court recently found time-barred, an income tax reassessment notice generated by the Department on the last day of the limitation window but, issued to the assessee only a day after.The limitation period in the case at hand expired on June 30, 2025 (inclusive).The Income Tax Department claimed that the notice was generated on June 30, 2025 at 21:14:46 and signed on June 30, 2025 at 21:16:15 however, due to a technical glitch, it was shared on the assessee's e-filing portal only...

Income Tax Act | ITAT Delhi Grants Relief In S.10(10D) Dispute; AO Directed To Reassess ULIP Maturity Proceeds Treated as Unexplained Investment

The Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has remitted back the addition of capital gains deduction to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication in absence of a remand report despite repeated reminders.The Bench, comprising Mr. Mahavir Singh (Vice President) on the claim of assessee that income was an exempt income for being a sum received under life insurance policy noted AO's failure to furnish remand report. “It is noted that Ld. CIT(A) has admitted the additional...

Assessee Missed Hearing Due To Faulty VC Link & Hearing Email Sent At 3AM: Kerala High Court Quashes CIT(A) Order

The Kerala High Court has set aside an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) after finding that the assessee missed the hearing due to the non-functional video-conference link (VC link) and because the hearing link was emailed at an odd hour, i.e., at 3:13 a.m. CDT (Central Daylight Time) while he was in the U.S. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. stated that the assessee could not utilise the opportunities for reasons beyond his control. Therefore, the assessee can be...

Income Tax Act | Alternative Remedy No Bar When Reassessment Notice Lacks Jurisdiction U/S 148/149: Sikkim High Court

The Sikkim High Court stated that when the reassessment notice itself is illegal, issued without jurisdiction, or beyond the time limit prescribed under the Income Tax Act, the Court can directly examine the validity of the notice under Article 226, even though an appeal under the Act is otherwise available.A Single Bench of the Sikkim High Court, comprising Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai, held that the availability of an alternative statutory remedy does not bar the exercise of writ...

International Tax Cases Not Exempt From Faceless Reassessment Regime: Bombay High Court Quashes S.148 IT Act Notice

The Bombay High Court quashed the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, stating that the reassessment notice did not follow the mandate that the Faceless Assessing Officer only has the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment and not the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. It was further stated that even international taxation matters could be made subject to the faceless regime. A Division Bench comprising Justices B.P. Colabawalla and Amit S....

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Cannot Pass Ex-Parte Orders Without Recording Reasons For Denying Adjournment: Allahabad High Court

While hearing an appeal under S. 260A of the Income Tax Act, the Allahabad High Court has held that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal cannot reject adjournment applications and pass ex-parte orders without recording reasons for such dismissal. It was held that if the Tribunal was allowed to do such a thing, it would hamper the right of the parties to a reasonable opportunity of hearing. “While inordinate delays in judicial decision making is not healthy and expeditious disposal of the...

Transfer Pricing Officer Cannot Cherry-Pick Transactions When Transactional Net Margin Method Is Accepted: ITAT Mumbai

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai has held that once the Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) is accepted for benchmarking all international transactions, the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) cannot cherry-pick only the management fee and assign an Arm's Length Price (ALP) at NIL. In the case in hand, the assessee had preferred an appeal before the ITAT seeking deletion of the Transfer Pricing adjustment on management fees and the consequential enhancement of income, being...

Refund Of Capital Advance From Karta To HUF Is Capital Receipt; Commercial Use Of Capital Does Not Convert It Into Income: ITAT Mumbai

On November 17th, 2025 the Bench of Shri Vikram Singh Yadav (Accountant Member) and Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Judicial Member) of the ITAT Mumbai partly allowed the appeal holding that the disallowance under Section 14A (Expenditure for exempt income) r/w Rule 8D cannot exceed the actual expenditure of ₹69,455 incurred by the assessee, and that the excess refund of ₹1,26,32,970 received on return of capital advance retained its character as a capital receipt and could not be taxed as...

Income Tax Act | Co-operative Societies Not Engaged In Banking Not Entitled To TDS Exemption U/S 194A(3)(iii): Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that co-operative societies not engaged in banking are not entitled to TDS (Tax Deducted at Source) exemption under section 194A (3)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. Section 194A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 provides exemptions from TDS on interest for certain persons or institutions. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. was dealing with a petition challenging the Constitutional validity of the proviso to section 194A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which imposed...

Income Tax Act | Rejection Of Settlement Application Does Not Affect Assessee's Right To Contest Assessment Order On Merits : Supreme Court

Rejection of an assessee's settlement application by the Income Tax Settlement Commission without offering settlement terms does not bar the assessee's right to challenge the assessment order on merits under the Income Tax Act, observed the Supreme Court. "The stand of the Revenue that the assessee must give up his right to contest the assessment order on merits, if the settlement application is rejected without providing for terms of settlement, is misconceived and must be rejected.", a bench...

Income Tax Act | Interest On Loan Advanced To Company Not Deductible Against Salary Income: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that a loan raised by mortgaging property and advancing to a company does not constitute business expenditure, and the interest is not deductible against salary income. The bench opined that unless expenditure is incurred in the course of the business or professional service, the assessee is not entitled to a deduction, merely due to it being incurred on the amount borrowed and advanced to the company. Justices D K Singh and Rajesh Rai K stated that...

Delhi High Court Raps Income Tax Dept For Over Two-Year Delay In Implementing ITAT Order; Directs Refund With Interest Within One Month

The Delhi High Court recently criticized the Income Tax Department for an over 2-year delay in implementing an ITAT order, directing it to reconsider the demand raised against an assessee.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and aShail Jain observed that the Income Tax Department must implement judicial orders with “alacrity” however in this case, it woke up only after the assessee moved the High Court to seek enforcement of the ITAT order passed back in January 2023.“The Court notes...