AI-curated court updates, legal developments, and practice-area insights for Indian legal professionals.
The High Court has remanded GST proceedings after it found the petitioner did not have a fair opportunity to respond to the show cause notice due to its improper upload.
The Kolkata ITAT has deleted the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) following the deletion of all quantum additions for the assessment year 2016-17 in the quantum appeal. This ruling emphasizes the relationship between penalties and the underlying assessments.
RBI clarifies FLA Return applicability and the filing process via FLAIR, with a late fee of ₹7,500. The due date for filing is set for July 31, 2026.
A new advisory outlines how to differentiate between genuine and fraudulent income tax notices. Taxpayers are encouraged to verify notice authenticity to avoid scams.
The Ministry of Finance has revised duty drawback rates, increasing refunds significantly for specific jewellery tariff items. This adjustment aims to support the jewellery export sector amidst changing economic conditions.
Two judges of the Delhi High Court disclosed their personal tax filing statuses ahead of a significant plea regarding the taxation of judges' allowances, indicating the potential personal implications of the case.
The ITAT clarified that disallowance of expenses under Section 37(1) is unsupported without specific adverse findings.
This article addresses common client inquiries during the ITR deadline week, providing practical insights for tax professionals.
This article highlights common discrepancies leading to income tax notices post ITR filing. It serves as a practical guide for tax practitioners and Chartered Accountants to ensure compliance and avoid scrutiny.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that minor typographical errors in manually entered DINs do not invalidate income tax orders. This ruling clarifies compliance requirements in tax proceedings.
The ITAT has ruled that loans repaid within the same financial year are not subject to income tax addition under Section 68. This decision aligns with prior judgments and clarifies tax liabilities for taxpayers.
The Calcutta High Court has ruled that respondents cannot contest the maintainability of customs appeals prior to their admission, directing ex parte proceedings. This ruling clarifies procedural aspects in customs appeals.
The CAAR Mumbai has classified Vistacell H under Tariff Item 21022000, ruling it as inactive yeast instead of an animal feed preparation under Heading 2309. This classification carries implications for tax obligations.