![Form No.67 is not mandatory but a directory requirement, Disallowance of FTC due to delay in filing the same not valid: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Form-No.67-directory-requirement-FTC-ITAT-taxscan.jpg "Form No.67 is not mandatory but a directory requirement, Disallowance of FTC due to delay in filing the same not valid: ITAT [Read Order]")
Form No.67 is not mandatory but a directory requirement, Disallowance of FTC due to delay in filing the same not valid: ITAT [Read Order]
Form No.67 is not mandatory but a directory requirement, the Bangalore Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that disallowance...
![Addition of Capital Gain u/s 68 as Unexplained Cash Credit without incriminating material is not permissible: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Capital-Gain-Unexplained-Cash-Credit-ITAT-taxscan.jpeg "Addition of Capital Gain u/s 68 as Unexplained Cash Credit without incriminating material is not permissible: ITAT [Read Order]")
![Allegation of Non-Payment of Outstanding Liability before due date of filing Income Tax Returns: ITAT allows outstanding Bonus claims u/s 43B [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/liability-income-returns-ITAT-bonus-claims-taxscan.jpeg "Allegation of Non-Payment of Outstanding Liability before due date of filing Income Tax Returns: ITAT allows outstanding Bonus claims u/s 43B [Read Order]")
![High Court’s Appellate Jurisdiction is limited to the fact that Tribunal is the Final Fact-Finding Authority: Delhi HC [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/High-Courts-Appellate-Jurisdiction-Tribunal-Fact-Finding-Authority-Delhi-HC-Taxscan.jpg "High Court’s Appellate Jurisdiction is limited to the fact that Tribunal is the Final Fact-Finding Authority: Delhi HC [Read Order]")
No Penalty even If Some Discrepancies found during Survey Once the Assessee already declared the Income in Return: ITAT [Read Order]
In recent case Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ), Jaipur held that even if some discrepancies were found during the survey resulting in surrender of income by the assessee, once the assessee has...
![No Penalty even If Some Discrepancies found during Survey Once the Assessee already declared the Income in Return: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Cross-Examination-ITAT-Taxscan.jpg "No Penalty even If Some Discrepancies found during Survey Once the Assessee already declared the Income in Return: ITAT [Read Order]")
Sale Proceedings need not be Invested in Specified Govt Scheme New Property is purchased within Three Years: ITAT [Read Order]
The Delhi bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that there is no need to invest the sale proceedings in the specified Government schemes when the assessee has purchased the new...
![Sale Proceedings need not be Invested in Specified Govt Scheme New Property is purchased within Three Years: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Sale-Plots-Taxscan.jpg "Sale Proceedings need not be Invested in Specified Govt Scheme New Property is purchased within Three Years: ITAT [Read Order]")
Return Filed by a Govt Undertaking on the basis of Provisional Information must be accepted since the Audit of Account was not within Hands of Assessee: ITAT [Read Order]
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) allowed the appeal of the assessee and held that Return filed by a Govt Undertaking on the basis of Provisional Information must be accepted since the audit...
![Return Filed by a Govt Undertaking on the basis of Provisional Information must be accepted since the Audit of Account was not within Hands of Assessee: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/ITAT-Taxscan.jpg "Return Filed by a Govt Undertaking on the basis of Provisional Information must be accepted since the Audit of Account was not within Hands of Assessee: ITAT [Read Order]")
Amendment to Sec 40(a)(ia) extending the period of TDS payment upto the due date under Sec 139(1) is Retrospective: Bombay HC [Read Order]
In CIT v. Shraddha & S S Kale, the Bombay High Court held that amendment to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act by Finance Act, 2010 w.e.f. 1st April 2010, is retrospective. Earlier, the ITAT...
![Amendment to Sec 40(a)(ia) extending the period of TDS payment upto the due date under Sec 139(1) is Retrospective: Bombay HC [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Bombay-High-Court-Tax-Scan.jpg "Amendment to Sec 40(a)(ia) extending the period of TDS payment upto the due date under Sec 139(1) is Retrospective: Bombay HC [Read Order]")
CBDT extends due date for filing Income Tax returns by tax payers whose accounts are required to be audited to Oct 17th 2016 [Read Order]
In an order issued today, the Central Board of Direct Taxes(CBDT) has extended the last date for filing of Income tax returns by taxpayers whose accounts are required to be audited under Income Tax...
![CBDT extends due date for filing Income Tax returns by tax payers whose accounts are required to be audited to Oct 17th 2016 [Read Order]](/images/placeholder.jpg "CBDT extends due date for filing Income Tax returns by tax payers whose accounts are required to be audited to Oct 17th 2016 [Read Order]")