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 ITAT dismisses a taxpayer’s claim for expenses against income disclosed during a survey but sets aside the application of a higher tax rate on the same income.
Disallowance of ₹28,99,56,987/- towards finance costs on securitization transactions had no basis, as the interest income rightly belonged to the SPVs and not the assessee. Likewise, the addition of ₹1,61,82,000/- under section 69A read with section 115BBE was unjustified since the cash deposits in Specified Bank Notes represented genuine loan repayments from microfinance borrowers and could not be treated as unexplained.
Delhi ITAT rules in favor of Sai Man Education Society, deleting a Rs.26 lakh tax addition on a corpus donation and clarifying the application of Section 115BBE.
The ITAT in Surya Kant Gupta vs. ITO deleted an income addition, ruling that cash withdrawals can explain deposits and the 60% tax rate doesn’t apply retrospectively.
ITAT Delhi held that applicability of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act without initially fixing the addition under any of the charging provisions i.e. section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D of the Income Tax Act is not tenable in the eye of law. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
ITAT Hyderabad deletes ₹33 lakh addition under Section 115BBE, ruling that cash seized and declared as business income should be taxed at normal rates, not as unexplained income.
Summary of Deepika Garg vs. ITO (ITAT Chandigarh) for AY 2017-18. The ruling deletes a Rs. 24 lakh addition for alleged bogus cash sales, upholding the assessee’s audited books and documented transactions.
ITAT Jaipur deletes ₹6.26 Cr. addition u/s 68, stating it would be double taxation. Tribunal also rules that the CIT(A) exceeded jurisdiction by remanding the case for verification of already submitted documents.
ITAT Delhi rules against double taxation, deleting a Rs.50.18 lakh addition after finding that cash deposits were sourced from sales already accepted and taxed.
ITAT Delhi rules recorded cash sales are not unexplained income under Section 68, preventing double taxation, even during demonetization, if books are accepted.
