Loading...

Tax News & Updates

Stay informed with the latest in tax and compliance

Share this page:
Due Date Form / Return Department Description Days Left
10 Aug 2026 GSTR-7
Jul, 26
GST Summary of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) and deposited under GST laws for the month of July, 2026 3d
10 Aug 2026 GSTR-8
Jul, 26
GST 3d
11 Aug 2026 GSTR-1
Jul, 26
GST 4d
13 Aug 2026 GSTR-5
Jul, 26
GST Summary of outward taxable supplies and tax payable by a non-resident taxable person 6d
13 Aug 2026 GSTR-6
Jul, 26
GST 6d
13 Aug 2026 IFF
Jul, 26
GST 6d
14 Aug 2026 Issue of TDS Certificate- under section 395(4) of the Income-tax Act 2025
Jun, 26
Income Tax 7d
15 Aug 2026 Issue of TDS Certificate - Other Than Salary
Apr - Jun, 26
Income Tax 8d
15 Aug 2026 TDS/TCS by Government without challan - Form No. 137
Jul, 26
Income Tax 8d
15 Aug 2026 Form 1
Jul, 26
Income Tax 8d
15 Aug 2026 TCS Certificate
Apr - Jun, 26
Income Tax 8d
15 Aug 2026 PF & ESIC Payment
Jul, 26
PF & ESIC 8d
20 Aug 2026 GSTR-5A
Jul, 26
GST Summary of outward taxable supplies and tax payable by a person supplying OIDAR services 13d
20 Aug 2026 GSTR-3B
Jul, 26
GST 13d
25 Aug 2026 PMT-06
Jul, 26
GST 18d

New Settlement Board Proposed

INCOME TAX
Share:

Proposal to Extend Time for Updated ITR

INCOME TAX
Share:

Proposed Relief for Delayed TDS/TCS Deposits

INCOME TAX
Share:

GSTN Keeps Proposed E-Way Bill Enhancements on Hold

GST
Share:

Income Tax Department Launches Foreign Assets Information (FAI) Report on Compliance Portal

INCOME TAX
Share:

CBDT Authorises Upload of AEOI Information in Form 168 AIS

INCOME TAX
Share:

GSTAT Introduces Token System to Protect Appeal Filing Deadline till 31st July 2026

GST
Share:

MCA Extends Companies Compliance Facilitation Scheme (CCFS-2026) till 31st August 2026

COMPANY LAW
Share:

Rollout of second set of Statutory Forms under Income Tax Rules, 2026

INCOME TAX
Share:

Government Extends Time Limit for Filing GSTAT Appeals in Pending Cases

GST
Share:

CBDT Approves University of Hyderabad for Scientific Research

INCOME TAX
Share:

Registered Valuers Rules Amended

COMPANY LAW
Share:

Due to the MCA21 system disruption, MCA has extended

COMPANY LAW
Share:

MCA Relaxes Additional Fees for DPT-3 Filing

COMPANY LAW
Share:

GSTAT Mumbai Bench Operational

GST
Share:

GSTAT May Simplify Adjournment Process

GST
Share:

Simpler Documentation for GST Appeals

GST
Share:

Relief for Defect Rectification in GST Appeals

GST
Share:

GSTAT Appeals May Go Fully Digital

GST
Share:

GSTN Extends E-Way Bill Changes Deadline

GST
Share:

GST Show Cause Notice Issued to Dissolved Amalgamating Company Held Void Ab Initio.

PartiesKanakia Spaces Realty (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India
CourtHIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
CitationWRIT PETITION NO. 2586 OF 2026
Decision
The HC held that proceedings initiated against a dissolved amalgamating company are void ab initio and without jurisdiction. Section 87 of the CGST Act does not permit the issuance of an SCN to a non-existent entity after amalgamation. The impugned demand order was set aside, while preserving the Departments liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.
GST
Share:

GST Registration Cancellation Quashed for Defective Service of SCN

PartiesSamadhan Seva Samiti v. Union of India
CourtHIGH COURT OF PATNA
CitationCivil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 945 of 2026
Decision
The HC held that exclusive portal upload of the SCN violated the mandatory service requirements u/s 169 and the principles of natural justice. The cancellation order and appellate order were set aside as the petitioner had been denied a fair opportunity of hearing. The department was permitted to commence fresh cancellation proceedings only after proper service of notice and compliance with statutory hearing requirements.
GST
Share:

Assessment completed without an effective hearing violates natural justice and warrants remand.

PartiesPricewaterhouse Coopers (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
CourtHIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
CitationWPO No. 212 of 2026 IA Nos. GA 1 & 2 of 2026
Decision
The HC held that a writ petition is maintainable where an assessment order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, notwithstanding the availability of an appellate remedy. It held that the assessee was denied a meaningful and effective opportunity of hearing, rendering the assessment order legally unsustainable. The assessment order, demand notice and penalty proceedings were quashed, and the matter was remanded for fresh assessment after granting a proper personal hearing.
INCOME TAX
Share:

State Must Reimburse Differential GST Arising from VAT-to-GST Transition in Ongoing Works Contracts.

PartiesEr. Roland S. Fernandes v. Government of Karnataka
CourtHIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CitationWRIT PETITION NO.104669 OF 2026 (GM-RES)
Decision
The Karnataka HC held that the issue was already settled and that the recipient of the works contract service (the State) is liable to bear the differential GST arising solely because of the transition from VAT to GST. The Court allowed the writ petition and directed the State to determine the eligible differential GST and reimburse the amount within six weeks, after verification of records and calculations, restricting reimbursement only to the additional tax attributable to the introduction of GST.
GST
Share:

Estimated addition alone cannot justify concealment penalty under Section 271(1)(c).

PartiesPrincipal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Elcon Pipe and Fittings (P.) Ltd.
CourtHIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
CitationIT APPEAL NO. 77 OF 2020
Decision
The Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is not sustainable where the addition is based only on estimation. The Court followed its earlier ruling in Colo Colour (P.) Ltd. holding that estimated additions cannot justify a concealment penalty. The Revenues appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law arose.
INCOME TAX
Share:

Survey-disclosed business income qualifies for section 40(b) deduction.

PartiesParashuram Dayaram Jewellers v. Income-tax Officer
CourtHIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
CitationR/TAX APPEAL NO. 213 of 2009
Decision
The HC held that income surrendered during a survey, once treated as business income, qualifies for all regular business deductions. Partners remuneration u/s 40(b) is allowable on such business income. The assessees appeal was allowed, and the Tribunals denial of partners remuneration was set aside.
INCOME TAX
Share:

Short TDS deduction doesnot trigger Section 40(a)(ia) disallowance: Bombay HC

PartiesPrincipal Commissioner of Income-tax-16 v. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd.
CourtHIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
CitationIT APPEAL NO. 18 OF 2020
Decision
The HC upheld that a short deduction of TDS cannot result in a disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia). It approved a 0.5% corporate guarantee commission and upheld a deletion of the section 14A interest disallowance where sufficient own funds existed. The appeal was entertained only on the limited issue relating to Rule 8D(2)(iii); all other issues were rejected as not involving substantial questions of law.
INCOME TAX
Share:

Former director cannot be prosecuted for a companys return filing default occurring after his resignation.

PartiesRakesh Bhailalbhai Gandhi v. Income-tax Officer
CourtHIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
CitationWRIT PETITION NO. 1034 OF 2024
Decision
The Bombay HC held that the petitioner had ceased to be a director before the alleged default occurred and, therefore, could not be held vicariously liable u/s 276CC and 278B. The Court quashed the criminal proceedings and the orders issuing process against the petitioner, holding that no offence was made out against him. The prosecution against the remaining accused was allowed to continue, and the Trial Court was directed to dispose of the case expeditiously.
INCOME TAX
Share:

Search year is the starting point for computing the extended ten-year reassessment period.

PartiesMadhav Power (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
CourtHIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
CitationR/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7305 of 2026
Decision
The Gujarat HC held that the search assessment year must be included while computing the extended ten-year period under Explanation 1 to Section 153A. The Court ruled that the notice issued u/s 148 for AY 2015-16 was beyond the permissible ten-year limitation and, therefore, invalid. Accordingly, the HC quashed the reassessment notice, holding it to be barred by limitation.
INCOME TAX
Share:

R&D Expenses Cannot Reduce Section 80IB/80IC Deduction Without Direct Link

PartiesPrincipal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Macelods Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
CourtHIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
CitationIT APPEAL NO. 267 OF 2024
Decision
The HC held that R&D expenditure cannot be apportioned to eligible manufacturing units without evidence establishing a direct nexus. Independent R&D units with separate audited accounts and unrelated research activities justified the assessees claim that the expenditure was not attributable to the eligible units. Since the Revenue failed to produce any supporting material, the appeal was dismissed, and the Tribunals order was affirmed.
INCOME TAX
Share:

Section 148 Reopening Invalid Without Live Nexus Between Seized Material and Assessee

PartiesVinod Parsotam Rabara v. Income-tax Offier
CourtHIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
CitationR/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6600 of 2026
Decision
The Gujarat HC held that the seized inquiry register did not establish any live or direct nexus between the alleged on-money payment and the assessee. The Court ruled that reassessment based only on an old, uncorroborated register entry amounted to mere conjectures and surmises. Accordingly, the Court quashed the notice issued u/s 148 and allowed the assessees writ petition.
INCOME TAX
Share:

Section 149 Reopening Valid if Escapement Was Likely Above Rs. 50 Lakh

PartiesJitendra Shankarlal Mistri v. Income-tax Officer
CourtHIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
CitationR/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7485, 7605 and 7726 of 2026
Decision
The HC held that reopening u/s 149(1)(b) is valid where the available information is likely to indicate escaped income of Rs. 50 lakh or more, and the final assessed amount does not determine the validity of the notice. The Court observed that the actual escaped income can only be ascertained after completion of reassessment, and a subsequent determination below the threshold does not invalidate the section 148 notice. The writ petition was dismissed.
INCOME TAX
Share:

Hasty transfer and revision proceedings without fair hearing during COVID violate natural justice.

PartiesBhagyanagar India Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-I
CourtHIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
CitationWRIT PETITION No. 10557 of 2021
Decision
The Court held that both the transfer and revision proceedings were conducted in undue haste during the COVID period, violating natural justice. Passing the section 263 order before the later scheduled hearing date further demonstrated procedural unfairness. The orders u/s 127 and 263 were set aside, with liberty to the Department to commence fresh proceedings in accordance with law.
INCOME TAX
Share:

Multiple financial years cannot be clubbed in one GST show-cause notice to bypass limitation.

PartiesState Bank of India v. Commercial CGST & CE, SLG Commissionerate
CourtHIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
CitationWPA No. 433 OF 2026
Decision
The HC held that each FY is a separate unit for limitation u/s 74, and a single SCN cannot club multiple FYs. The composite SCN and the consequential adjudication order were held to be illegal, without jurisdiction, and were quashed. The Revenue was granted liberty to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law, if otherwise permissible.
GST
Share:

Portal service alone is sufficient; failure to monitor GST portal cannot invalidate Section 74 proceedings.

PartiesSKM Infraventure (P.) Ltd. v. CT & GST Office
CourtHIGH COURT OF ORISSA
CitationWP(C) No.7800 of 2026
Decision
Uploading notices and orders on the common GST portal is a valid service u/s 169, and no additional mode of service is required. The assessees participation in the proceedings disproved their claim of ignorance, and failure to check the GST portal could not invalidate the proceedings. The HC found no ground to exercise writ jurisdiction and dismissed the petition in favour of the Revenue.
GST
Share:

Full tax paid within time amounts to substantial compliance; wrong GST head payment is a curable procedural lapse.

PartiesAyiswarya Polymers v. Assistant commissioner of GST and Central Excise
CourtHIGH COURT OF MADRAS
CitationWP No. 22814 of 2026 W.M.P. Nos. 24747 & 24748 of 2026
Decision
The Madras HC held that payment of the entire tax liability within the statutory time amounted to substantial compliance with section 128A. It ruled that payment under the wrong tax head was a procedural error and could not be the sole ground for denying waiver. The Court set aside the rejection order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration after allowing the assessee to rectify the head-wise payment.
GST
Share:

DRC-03 payment extracted during search without voluntary compliance cannot be retained by the department.

PartiesBaba Contractors and Engineers v. Union of India
CourtHIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
CitationD.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21298 OF 2025
Decision
The HC held that the payment made during the search was not voluntary and could not be retained by the department. The Court directed the department to refund Rs. 2.35 crore within eight weeks, while allowing it to continue the investigation in accordance with the law. The Court declined to grant interest on the refund, as the final tax liability was yet to be determined.
GST
Share:

HC restored the GST appeal, holding that the delay caused by the wrong portal upload should not defeat adjudication on the merits.

PartiesAppanna Rangappa Roogi v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
CourtHIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CitationWRIT PETITION NO. 102532 OF 2026 (T-RES)
Decision
The Karnataka HC held that, despite the statutory limitation on condonation, binding precedents justified interference in the case. The Court set aside the order dismissing the appeal as time-barred and condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The appeal was restored to the Appellate Authority with directions to decide it on merits, keeping all contentions of both parties open.
GST
Share:

Revenue Precluded from Raising Fresh Contention on Netting of Appreciation Before High Court

PartiesPrincipal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Karnataka Bank Ltd.
CourtSUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CitationSpecial Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 18972 of 2026
Decision
The HC held that the Revenue could not raise the issue of netting off appreciation for the first time in appeal since it was not argued before the Tribunal. The SC found no valid ground to interfere with the HCs judgment under Article 136 of the Constitution. Accordingly, the SLP filed by the Revenue was dismissed, and the decision remained in favour of the assessee-bank.
INCOME TAX
Share:

Vivad Se Vishwas Benefit Allowed Despite Stay on Assessment Order

PartiesTarik Handa v. ITO
CourtHIGH COURT OF DELHI
CitationW.P. (C) No. 7256 OF 2025 CM APPL. No. 32671 OF 2025-STAY
Decision
The Delhi HC held that the assessment order was very much in existence on the date of filing the application, even though its enforcement was suspended by the interim order. The Court clarified that the expression not be given effect to only restrains recovery and consequential actions such as penalty proceedings; it does not negate the existence of the assessment order itself. The Court allowed the assessee to file a fresh application under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
INCOME TAX
Share: