Income Tax : This FAQ guide explains the applicability of ITR forms, filing methods, due dates, penalties, and taxpayer obligations for AY 2026...
Income Tax : This guide explains when penalties can be imposed under various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It also outlines the appli...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that an addition under Section 69A cannot be sustained when the assessee is denied the opportunity to cross-exami...
Income Tax : ITAT held that additions based solely on third-party search material without independent evidence or cross-examination are invalid...
Income Tax : A large spousal gift exemption was denied due to failure in proving genuineness, creditworthiness, and source of funds. The ruling...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held that non-compliance with Section 144B raised a jurisdictional issue requiring ITAT adjudication and set asi...
Income Tax : ITAT Allahabad held that estimating gross profit solely on the basis of the subsequent years GP rate is not justified after reject...
Income Tax : ITAT held that mere transfer of records cannot replace a valid transfer of jurisdiction under Section 127, rendering the assessmen...
Income Tax : ITAT Surat held that rural agricultural land falls outside Section 2(14), deleting capital gains and related additions....
Income Tax : ITAT remanded the matter after holding that the CIT(A) passed a non-speaking order without giving reasons or properly considering ...
Income Tax : CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies...
ITAT held that additions based solely on third-party search material without independent evidence or cross-examination are invalid. The burden of proof lies on the department.
Karnataka High Court rejects Revenues appeal, holds Sec 69A addition unsustainable where cash source explained with evidence; human conduct theory cannot replace proof, penalty also quashed.
The Tribunal held that an unsigned agreement without corroboration cannot be treated as incriminating material. Proceedings under section 153C were declared invalid.
The Tribunal examined whether an increase in loans was due to fresh borrowing or reclassification. It remanded the matter for verification, holding that no addition is warranted if no new funds were received.
The issue was whether purchases could be treated as bogus based on investigation reports. ITAT held that when documentary evidence and asset existence are proven, additions cannot be sustained.
The Tribunal ruled that bank deposits cannot be treated as unexplained income when linked to regular business activity. It upheld that consistent past records supported the assessee’s claim of business receipts.
A large spousal gift exemption was denied due to failure in proving genuineness, creditworthiness, and source of funds. The ruling highlights that documentation is crucial even for exempt transactions under tax law.
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer went beyond revisionary directions by including additional issues. It ruled that such excess additions were invalid and liable to be deleted.
The Tribunal held that the higher 60% tax rate under Section 115BBE cannot apply to transactions prior to 01.04.2017. It directed application of 30%, reinforcing that amendments apply prospectively.
The issue was addition of cash deposits during demonetisation as unexplained income. The Tribunal held that the assessee’s explanation supported by affidavit was credible, leading to deletion of the addition.
