Income Tax : Section 115BBE imposes a high tax rate on unexplained income to prevent tax evasion. Learn about tax rates, penalties, and complia...
Income Tax : The Sections by which the assessees are suffering too much due to high pitched assessments passed by NFAC are from 68 to 69D and 1...
Income Tax : Learn about Income Tax Returns (ITR) forms for different taxpayers, filing methods, and requirements. Includes details on ITR-1, I...
Income Tax : Learn about penalty provisions under the IT Act, including penalties for defaults in tax payment, income reporting, and more. Key ...
Income Tax : Explore the intricacies of gold taxation in India, covering physical gold, paper gold, gold derivatives, inheritance tax, and comp...
Income Tax : Additional income offered by assessee on account of cash and excess stock is liable to be taxed as business income and not unexpla...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai rules bad debt recovery as business income, deleting Rs. 1 crore addition under Section 69A. Read full details on the...
Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur held that addition of the amount already recorded as cash sales cannot be treated as unexplained cash deposits under s...
Income Tax : ITAT Lucknow held that addition by calculating sales on hypothetical basis and completely ignoring various evidences submitted dur...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained money not legally sustainable since na...
In the case of Anil Champalal Jain vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai), learn why Mumbai ITAT ruled that cash deposits during demonetization alone cannot justify income addition without clear evidence of accounting errors. Read the full text of the order for detailed insights.
Read the detailed ITAT Chennai order on Rameshlal Kailash Vs ITO for AY 2017-18. Money lending business income added, upheld as business income despite challenges. Full text of the order included.
Merely because certain cash was deposited in the specified bank notes by the assessee during the demonetization period will not make the assessee tainted party when the very same transaction are being made by the assessee in the part as well as in the future.
Discover the ITAT Chennai verdict on Santhilal Jain Vijay Kumar Vs ITO, addressing taxation on excess stock and unexplained marriage expenses. Read the full case analysis.
If AO adopts a plausible view, even if two views are possible, the assessment cannot be deemed erroneous merely because the PCIT holds a different opinion.
Understand Parmod Singla Vs ACIT (ITAT Chandigarh) case on excess stock surrendered during survey and its tax implications under Sections 69, 69A, and 115BBE.
Read the detailed analysis of the ITAT Chandigarh verdict on DDK Spinning Mills vs DCIT, focusing on the implications of Section 69B and 115BBE of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chennai rules in favor of Revathi Modern Rice Mill, determining that excess stock is assessable as business income, not unexplained investment under Sec. 69B.
The ITAT Bangalore ruled that income tax additions can’t be based solely on unsubstantiated loose slips, emphasizing the need for corroborative material evidence.
ITAT Ahmedabad rules no tax on cash deposits from relatives if affidavits provided. Sakina Ahmedali Kantavala vs ITO case highlights proper affidavit usage in tax assessments.
