The ITAT Bangalore in the case of Suresh Sharma vs ITO reaffirms the principle that penalty proceedings under Section 271A of the Income Tax Act cannot be initiated if the Books of Account are properly maintained
A detailed analysis of the recent ITAT Bangalore ruling in Anaveer Proprietor Vs ITO. The matter has been restored for reconsideration of the source of cash deposits during demonetization linked with LPG cylinder sales.
ITAT Bangalore Held that not every deposit during the demonetization period would fall under category of unaccounted cash. However the burden is on the assessee to establish the genuineness of the deposit in order to fall outside the scope of unaccounted cash. Matter remanded for re-verification.
Delve into the recent ITAT Bangalore case of Balram Corporate Services Pvt Ltd Vs ITO, discussing the non-retrospective nature of late fee charges under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act.
Explore our in-depth analysis of the recent ITAT Bangalore ruling on Veereshayya Angadi Vs ITO case, focusing on the issue of penalty for excessive refund claims influenced by a tax consultant.
In the case of Rammohan Kordale vs ACIT, ITAT Bangalore held that money transferred between assessee’s joint bank accounts cannot be classified as unexplained money under Section 69A of Income Tax Act.
Explore the verdict of ITAT Bangalore in the case of Hemavathi Ramesh Vs ITO, where cash deposits from earlier deposits were deemed taxable. Delve into the legal nuances and implications of the judgement.
An in-depth analysis of case between Blue Reservoir Business Services LLP and DCIT where ITAT Bangalore directed re-adjudication because assessee was not well-versed with ITBA
The ITAT Bangalore has allowed the appeal of Dunichand Khitri Raja against the disallowance of a claim for deduction under section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act. The ITAT held that the delay in filing Form 10CCB, due to technical glitches beyond the assessee’s control, should not bar the claim of deduction.
The ITAT Bangalore has directed the re-adjudication of the case of Satish Panduranga against the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on the ground of non-reply to a notice issued during the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 2017-18.
