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...
Bangalore ITAT remands case for reassessment of post-demonetization cash deposits by a bar & restaurant owner, directing AO to verify business income claims.
ITAT Raipur held that addition towards unexplained cash deposits under section 69A of the Income Tax Act is liable to be set aside in as much as the source of cash deposits duly explained. Accordingly, appeal restored to AO with direction to re-adjudicate the issue.
ITAT Bangalore remands case concerning cash deposits during demonetization, directing the AO to re-assess the addition u/s 69A after considering CBDT circulars and granting the assessee a fair hearing.
In the matter abovementioned ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee after deleting the addition made u/s 68 after observing the fact that assessee had filed relevent details during assesssment.
ITAT Delhi sets aside search assessment in Amit Gupta & Sons HUF case, citing lack of proper approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Raipur held that AO has passed the final assessment order u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 153B(b) of the Act without seeking a prior approval of the same by the Jt. CIT u/s. 153D of the Income Tax Act and hence the order so passed is liable to be quashed.
It is submitted on behalf of assessee that he is engaged in the business of transportation and logistics services and such business is being conducted by the assessee in his personal capacity as well as in capacity of the Proprietor of “M/s Tanvi Roadways”.
ITAT Pune remands an ex-parte order after considering the senior citizen assessee’s tech constraints, allowing fresh appeal proceedings with a fair hearing.
CIT (A) was right in its decision to delete the addition of Rs. 2.92 crore made by AO under Section 69B for alleged undervaluation of closing stock as the books of accounts was not rejected, therefore, the observation of AO that the same were not reliable.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that additions under section 68 of the Income Tax Act is not sustainable since assessee established identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the lenders. Accordingly, addition u/s. 68 deleted.
