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...
In the case of Anil Champalal Jain vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai), learn why Mumbai ITAT ruled that cash deposits during demonetization alone cannot justify income addition without clear evidence of accounting errors. Read the full text of the order for detailed insights.
Read the detailed ITAT Chennai order on Rameshlal Kailash Vs ITO for AY 2017-18. Money lending business income added, upheld as business income despite challenges. Full text of the order included.
Merely because certain cash was deposited in the specified bank notes by the assessee during the demonetization period will not make the assessee tainted party when the very same transaction are being made by the assessee in the part as well as in the future.
Discover the ITAT Chennai verdict on Santhilal Jain Vijay Kumar Vs ITO, addressing taxation on excess stock and unexplained marriage expenses. Read the full case analysis.
If AO adopts a plausible view, even if two views are possible, the assessment cannot be deemed erroneous merely because the PCIT holds a different opinion.
Understand Parmod Singla Vs ACIT (ITAT Chandigarh) case on excess stock surrendered during survey and its tax implications under Sections 69, 69A, and 115BBE.
Read the detailed analysis of the ITAT Chandigarh verdict on DDK Spinning Mills vs DCIT, focusing on the implications of Section 69B and 115BBE of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chennai rules in favor of Revathi Modern Rice Mill, determining that excess stock is assessable as business income, not unexplained investment under Sec. 69B.
The ITAT Bangalore ruled that income tax additions can’t be based solely on unsubstantiated loose slips, emphasizing the need for corroborative material evidence.
ITAT Ahmedabad rules no tax on cash deposits from relatives if affidavits provided. Sakina Ahmedali Kantavala vs ITO case highlights proper affidavit usage in tax assessments.
