Answers to queries on legal issues
| 148 notice issued for wrong deduction claimed in original return | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | 148 notice issued for wrong deduction claimed in original return |
| Category: | Income-Tax |
| Asked by: | SUNDARARAMAN |
| Answered by: | Law Intern |
| Tags: | Reassessment |
| Date: | October 15, 2025 |
| Excerpt of answer: |
The ITO will consider the ITR filed under Section 148 for the purpose of assessment. (read more)
|
| Section 80IAC of the Income Tax Act dealing with grant of recognition for eligible business | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Section 80IAC of the Income Tax Act dealing with grant of recognition for eligible business |
| Category: | Income-Tax |
| Asked by: | S.Thyagarajan |
| Answered by: | Law Intern |
| Tags: | Section 80-IAC |
| Date: | October 15, 2025 |
| Excerpt of answer: |
No. It is not possible to claim the deduction u/s 80-IAC without first obtaining the IMB certificate of eligible business. S. 80-IAC(3)(iii) requires the startup to hold the certificate from the IMB at the time of claiming the deduction. Also, Form 10CCB (audit report from a CA) is required to be attached. (read more)
|
| Deed of Release and Reconstitution of HUF | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Deed of Release and Reconstitution of HUF |
| Category: | Allied Law |
| Asked by: | Nagesh Bhaskar Gadiyar |
| Answered by: | Law Intern |
| Tags: | Deed of Release, HUF, Stamp Duty |
| Date: | October 13, 2025 |
| Excerpt of answer: |
The Deed of Release will attract Article 52 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958. As the release is of joint family property in favor of family members or the continuing HUF, the duty is a nominal Rs. 200. You may refer Government Circular dated April 21, 2018 and GR dated March 25, 2015 available on… (read more)
|
| Applicable of section 194i on lease property | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Applicable of section 194i on lease property |
| Category: | Income-Tax |
| Asked by: | AMIYA KUMAR Sahoo |
| Answered by: | Law Intern |
| Tags: | Circular No. 35/2016, Section 194-I |
| Date: | October 13, 2025 |
| Excerpt of answer: |
It can be argued that the one-time lease premium paid for the 99 years lease is not "rent" as it is a payment for acquiring the property and is not for "use" of the property. In Foxconn India Developer (P) Ltd. v. ITO, the Madras High Court held that a one-time, non-refundable upfront payment (premium… (read more)
|
| Section 45(A) R/W 54 | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Section 45(A) R/W 54 |
| Category: | Income-Tax |
| Asked by: | M.V.SHARMA |
| Answered by: | Law Intern |
| Tags: | Section 54F deduction |
| Date: | October 13, 2025 |
| Excerpt of answer: |
The gains on the transfer of the land will become taxable this year u/s 45(5A) as the OC has been issued this year. The stamp duty value of the six flats will be treated as the consideration for the transfer. The sale of the two flats is a separate taxing event. This will be assessable… (read more)
|
| ITC REVERSE RATE DIFFERENCE | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | ITC REVERSE RATE DIFFERENCE |
| Category: | GST |
| Asked by: | kollipara sundaraiah |
| Answered by: | Law Intern |
| Tags: | ITC reversal |
| Date: | October 13, 2025 |
| Excerpt of answer: |
In my view, ITC reversal is not compulsory solely due to the tax rate difference (12% to 5%) because the supply is not "exempt." ITC reversal u/s 18(4) of the CGST Act & Rule 44 is triggered only when outward supplies become wholly exempt or the taxpayer switches to the composition scheme. Since medicines at… (read more)
|
| please give any case law for condonation of delay in filing of appeal with cit appeals | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | please give any case law for condonation of delay in filing of appeal with cit appeals |
| Category: | Income-Tax |
| Asked by: | CA Praveen Bansal |
| Answered by: | Law Intern |
| Tags: | condonation of delay |
| Date: | October 9, 2025 |
| Excerpt of answer: |
Condonation of delay really depends on facts on whether there was sufficient cause for the delay and the period of delay. In Kumar Mahesh Chandra v. CIT (ITAT Mumbai in ITA No. 1234/Mum/2015), delay of 92 days in filing appeal before CIT(A) was condoned due to the assessee's reliance on erroneous advice from a tax… (read more)
|
| Penalty u/s 271E | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Penalty u/s 271E |
| Category: | Income-Tax |
| Asked by: | CA Pramod Patni |
| Answered by: | Law Intern |
| Tags: | Section 271E |
| Date: | October 9, 2025 |
| Excerpt of answer: |
Yes. Penalty under Section 271E can be levied without waiting for the decision in the appeals against the reassessment proceedings as these proceedings are independent. Pendency of appeal does not create any legal embargo. (read more)
|
| E filed ITR after due date with a fine of ₹5000/-. While e filing “Access Denied” error occured, which can be corrected only by the income tax dept. Correction is made after due date, so I have to pay the fine. So I request to refund the fine already paid. Am I eligible to get the refund? | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | E filed ITR after due date with a fine of ₹5000/-. While e filing “Access Denied” error occured, which can be corrected only by the income tax dept. Correction is made after due date, so I have to pay the fine. So I request to refund the fine already paid. Am I eligible to get the refund? |
| Category: | Income-Tax |
| Asked by: | Valsala Kuriakose |
| Answered by: | Law Intern |
| Tags: | Late return, Section 234E |
| Date: | October 9, 2025 |
| Excerpt of answer: |
Yes. You are entitled to a refund of the late filing fee. There have been other cases where refund has been granted. You can file a grievance petition in the portal along with screenshots or other evidence. You can also call the helpline at 1800-103-0025 or 1800-419-0025. You can also file a rectification request u/s… (read more)
|
| Reopening for AY 2016-17 | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Reopening for AY 2016-17 |
| Category: | Income-Tax |
| Asked by: | sumit |
| Answered by: | Law Intern |
| Tags: | Reassessment |
| Date: | October 9, 2025 |
| Excerpt of answer: |
I agree with all the three points made. If ITO Ward 2(2)(3) is not the JAO, the notice u/s 148A(b) and subsequent notice u/s 148 are without jurisdiction. Escapement below ₹50 lakhs renders the reassessment time-barred as per Section 149. Approval by the PCIT instead of the Principal Chief Commissioner or equivalent violates Section 151,… (read more)
|