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...
An ITAT Delhi ruling has partially allowed appeals by the tax department, reducing significant cash deposit additions and clarifying the applicability of Section 115BBE.
The Delhi ITAT has ruled that while unexplained demonetization cash deposits are taxable, the 60% rate under Section 115BBE is not applicable for AY 2017-18.
ITAT Bangalore deletes a Section 68 addition on a trader’s demonetisation deposits, ruling that cash from business receipts cannot be taxed again after turnover is accepted.
The ITAT Delhi upheld the deletion of a ₹39.83 crore addition to Santosh Trust, ruling that its cash deposits during demonetization were explained by regular fee collections
ITAT Delhi: Cash deposits in a dissolved firms bank account are taxable only in the proprietors hands, not the partnerships. The protective addition was deleted.
Mumbai ITAT rules cash withdrawn before demonetization is not unexplained, deleting a ₹23 lakh addition. The tribunal partly upheld the disallowance of agricultural income.
Jai Prakash Virmani Vs DCIT/ACIT (ITAT Delhi) ITAT Delhi Holds Additional Income Applied Towards House Construction Cannot be Taxed Again as Unexplained Investment – Section 69 & 115BBE Not Applicable A survey u/s 133A was conducted at Assessee’s business premises on 23.01.2019. Loose papers indicating cash withdrawals & expenditure on construction of house were impounded. […]
ITAT Delhi: Addition on expensive watches deleted. The court held they belonged to the entire Kochar family, and possession was consistent with their status.
Chhattisgarh High Court rules cash-in-hand from a preceding year’s balance sheet cannot be taxed as unexplained money under Section 69A in a subsequent year.
The ITAT has remanded a tax appeal to the CIT(A) for a fresh review after the assessee’s submissions regarding excess stock were not considered in an ex-parte order.
