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...
ITAT Ahmedabad held that claim of assessee that income declared under Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana [PMGKY] and hence the same should not be treated as unexplained deposits needs verification. Hence, matter remitted to AO to verify the same.
Understand the consequences of an adverse income tax order, including high tax rates, penalties, interest, and steps to appeal or seek relief.
ITAT Surat held that provisions of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act are enacted on 15.12.2016 hence taxing addition at higher rate u/s. 115BBE for prior period is not sustainable. Accordingly, AO directed to tax addition at normal rate of tax.
Tribunal also took note of the fact that AO had merely reproduced identical reasons for multiple years without verifying facts or forming a belief based on individual year-specific material.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act towards capital contribution deleted since assessee furnished adequate evidence to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the partner. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act by treating LTCG as bogus merely on the basis of assumption and conjecture is not sustainable in law since purchase and sale of shares were made via banking channel.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that revisionary proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act not invocable as assessment made by AO after proper verification of evidences. Further, assessment order is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to interest of revenue.
ITAT Jodhpur partly allows appeal in Kishana Ram vs ITO, upholding additions related to capital discrepancies and agricultural income under Section 143(3).
Surat ITAT condones delay, restores Pareshbhai Godhani’s case to AO for fresh assessment of unexplained demonetization cash deposit.
ITAT Raipur held that addition towards cash deposited during demonization period partly set aside based on CBDT Instruction No. 03/2017 dated 21.02.2017. Accordingly, appeal of assessee partly allowed.
