Income Tax : Learn about penalty provisions under the IT Act, including penalties for defaults in tax payment, income reporting, and more. Key ...
Income Tax : Article explains how surrendered income is treated under I.T Act, particularly focusing on applicability of Sections 68 to 69D and...
Income Tax : Explore the discussion between CA Micky and CA Mini on Sections 68 & 44AD of the Income Tax Act. Learn about unexplained cash cred...
Income Tax : Explore recent Supreme Court rulings (2023) on income tax issues. Highlights of key cases, analysis, and implications....
Income Tax : Explore sections 68 to 69D of Income Tax Act 1961, covering unexplained cash credits, investments, and more. Learn about legal pro...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore rules CIT(A) cannot dismiss an income tax appeal on limitation grounds after con-doning the delay. Case remitted fo...
Income Tax : ITAT Cuttack held that difference between the sales declared in the profit and loss account and as per the cash book entire added ...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that the issuance of notice u/s. 148 based on cryptic reasons combined with a mechanical approval of the Pr.CIT u/...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that Section 68 doesn't apply to a partnership firm for capital introduced by partners, upholding a CIT(A) de...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi remands case to CIT(A) for ex-parte decision on unexplained cash credits, ignoring adjournment request filed via email....
Income Tax : Assessing Officers should follow the sequence as noted below for applying provisions of section 68 of the Act: Step 1: Whether the...
ITAT Bangalore rules CIT(A) cannot dismiss an income tax appeal on limitation grounds after con-doning the delay. Case remitted for fresh consideration.
ITAT Cuttack held that difference between the sales declared in the profit and loss account and as per the cash book entire added by PCIT without providing sufficient opportunity to reconcile the same. Thus, AO directed to examine the issue.
ITAT Delhi held that the issuance of notice u/s. 148 based on cryptic reasons combined with a mechanical approval of the Pr.CIT u/s. 151 of the Income Tax Act do not pass the test of judicial scrutiny. Thus, reassessment quashed.
ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that Section 68 doesn’t apply to a partnership firm for capital introduced by partners, upholding a CIT(A) decision. Appeal dismissed.
ITAT Delhi remands case to CIT(A) for ex-parte decision on unexplained cash credits, ignoring adjournment request filed via email. Case set for de-novo hearing.
ITAT Mumbai grants partial relief to Ramniklal & Sons in the bogus purchase case, directing reassessment based on judicial precedents.
Chhattisgarh High Court held that addition u/s. 68 r.w.s. 69A of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained income sustained since assessee failed to substantiate the nature and source of cash deposits in bank.
ITAT Ahmedabad quashed the reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act as intraday profit is less than limitation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for reopening of assessment u/s. 147 of the Act.
The assessee is in the wholesale distribution of sale of premium motorcycles manufactured by Ducati, Thailand to the dealers in India and in distribution of spare parts, accessories, clothing and merchandise imported from its Ducati group entities to the dealers in India.
Assessee explained that borrowed funds were used for investments in partnership firms, generating interest income exceeding expenses. AO accepted the claim and approved the returned income as assessed income.
