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 : ITAT held spousal gift taxable under Section 68 due to lack of evidence on genuineness, bank trail, and donor capacity despite Sec...
Income Tax : This covers how unexplained credits and investments are taxed under Sections 68 to 69D. The key takeaway is that additions require...
Income Tax : The ITAT Amritsar held that a valuation report by itself cannot justify addition under Section 69 without evidence of extra paymen...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that stamp duty valuation could not be blindly adopted where the property was affected by BBMP demolition proceeding...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that agricultural land situated beyond notified municipal limits is not a capital asset under the Income Tax Act...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that no unexplained investment addition could survive where the booked property deal was cancelled and funds w...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that penalty under Section 271AAC cannot survive once the underlying Section 153C assessment is quashed. The Tribu...
The Revenue sustained addition by assuming 50% of cash withdrawals were used for household expenses. The Tribunal ruled that suspicion-based estimates cannot replace evidence and granted substantial relief.
The Revenue invoked section 115BBE based on cash found during proceedings. However, the Tribunal found the foundational approval under section 153D defective. The entire assessment was therefore quashed.
ITAT Delhi held that mere Whatsapp messages showing demand do not justify Section 69A additions unless actual receipt of money is proved.
The dispute concerned computation of capital gains on sale of shares affected by corporate actions. The Tribunal affirmed that detailed tranche-wise analysis and statutory indexation justified allowance of long-term capital loss.
ITAT Ahmedabad remanded a ₹2.28 crore unexplained property investment case to the AO, allowing the assessee one final opportunity to provide supporting documents, while imposing a ₹5,000 cost for non-compliance.
The ITAT held that unrecorded sales cannot be taxed in full under Section 69A. Only the profit element at a reasonable GP rate is assessable as business income.
Calcutta High Court held that reassessment proceedings initiated under section 148 of the Income Tax Act based on the same survey material which was already accepted by AO in earlier proceedings is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, reassessment proceedings cannot be sustained.
The Tribunal considered reliance on investigation wing inputs alleging non-genuine entities. It ruled that adverse material must be shared with the assessee and corroborated through proper enquiry before sustaining additions.
ITAT Bangalore held that disallowing outstanding sub-contract expenses payable under section 68 of the Income Tax Act as unexplained cash credit without specific reasoning and without pointing out defects in books of accounts is not justifiable. Accordingly, appeal is allowed and disallowance is deleted.
The assessee claimed the firm had dissolved and deposits belonged to a partner. The Tribunal held that absence of documentary proof justified treating bank deposits as unexplained income.
