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...
ITAT Hyderabad orders fresh examination of Bollam Sampath Kumar Jewellers’ cash deposits and sales during demonetization, highlighting the importance of documentation.
In the landmark Mudhol Pattina Sahakari Sangh Niyamita vs. ACIT case, ITAT Bangalore held additions under Section 68 need examination of cash deposit source.
Ahmedabad ITAT allows Amikrupa Education Trust’s appeal, ruling cash deposits during demonetization with explained sources not taxable under Section 69A.
ITAT Bangalore rules in favor of Minority Co-op. Credit Society Ltd. on interest income deduction under section 80P(2)(d) from unlicensed co-op bank investments for AY 2017-18.
Explore the ITAT Rajkot’s detailed analysis of Vaidya Realities vs PCIT case under Section 263, highlighting the AO’s assessment, PCIT’s concerns, and the final verdict.
Explore the legal intricacies as ITAT Mumbai delves into the dispute over undisclosed income, cash receipts, and the application of Section 69A in the case of Madhu Developers
Dive into the recent ITAT judgment on Sec 69B & 115BBE, exploring the treatment of unrecorded stock in a business survey. Analysis of AO, CIT(A), and ITAT perspectives.
ITAT Bangalore directs re-evaluation of ex-parte assessment order on alleged bogus purchases by Kalu Singh. Detailed analysis and implications of the decision.
ITAT Mumbai held that documents seized from employees cannot be considered as having any evidentiary value and cannot be considered to have trustworthiness, since no other corroborative material was brought on record to support the veracity of the same. Hence, documents seized from employees cannot be relied upon for denying exemption u/s 11.
ITAT Chennai’s in Ethiraj Hotel Mart Vs DCIT held that as assessee declared excess stock as business income and provided a plausible explanation for its source, it should be taxed as ‘normal business income’ and not as ‘unexplained investment’ under section 69B.
