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...
Smt. Pavithra Sugichandran Vs Office of the DCIT (Madras High Court) The Madras High Court considered six writ petitions challenging assessment orders for Assessment Years (AYs) 2015-16 to 2020-21. The petitioner’s husband, a director of Gateway Office Parks Limited (GOPL), faced allegations of siphoning company funds, leading to a search and seizure operation. Materials allegedly […]
The ITAT Surat held that cash deposited during demonetisation was sufficiently explained through opening cash-in-hand, prior bank withdrawals, and cash received from the deceased husband. It ruled that Section 69A addition could not be sustained merely on assumptions about human conduct.
ITAT Pune held that reassessment proceedings were invalid because the approval under Section 151 was granted by the Principal Commissioner instead of the competent authority prescribed by law. The notice under Section 148 and the order under Section 148A(d) were quashed.
Bangalore ITAT held that cash redeposited during demonetisation could not be treated as unexplained under Section 69A when the assessee established that it originated from earlier bank withdrawals.
The ITAT Bangalore held that cash deposits could not be treated as unexplained where they were sourced from earlier withdrawals from the same bank account. It ruled that, in the absence of evidence showing the withdrawn cash was used elsewhere, the addition under Section 69A was unsustainable.
The Gujarat High Court set aside the reassessment after finding that the Assessing Officer failed to provide specific reasons for treating bank credits as unexplained cash credits under Section 68. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.
The ITAT Delhi held that cash deposits representing recorded business sales could not be treated as unexplained under Section 68 when the books of account and trading results had been accepted. It deleted the addition relating to demonetisation cash deposits.
The ITAT Pune held that deletion of the addition was premature as the source of cash payments reflected in seized diaries had not been properly examined. It remanded the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh verification.
This FAQ guide explains the applicability of ITR forms, filing methods, due dates, penalties, and taxpayer obligations for AY 2026-27. It also clarifies revised, belated, and updated return provisions to help ensure accurate compliance.
The ITAT held that registration granted under Section 12AA before completion of assessment entitled the trust to claim exemption for the earlier assessment year under the proviso to Section 12A(2). It also deleted the addition on donations.
