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...
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.
ITAT restored the case to the Assessing Officer to examine jurisdictional defects, evidence, and applicability of section 115BBE. Technical dismissal by the appellate authority was set aside.
