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 : This guide explains how unexplained cash credits under Section 68 and related provisions can attract steep taxation under Section ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that cash deposits during demonetisation cannot be treated as unexplained when backed by audited books, invoices...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that profit cannot be estimated arbitrarily when regular books of account are maintained and not rejected unde...
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 Kolkata deleted the Section 68 addition, holding that share application money already assessed in subscribers' hands cannot b...
Income Tax : Calcutta HC dismissed the Revenue's appeal after the remand report confirmed the disputed receipt was sale proceeds of investments...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held Section 68 cannot apply to sale proceeds of disclosed investments already recorded in books. Revenue's appeals wer...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held Section 68 inapplicable where shares were disclosed in an earlier year and sale proceeds were already offered as i...
Income Tax : ITAT Agra held Section 44AD could not apply where turnover exceeded the limit, adopted past profit history, allowed telescoping an...
Income Tax : CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies...
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 Chandigarh held that foundation of reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act based on wrong facts is not justifiable. Hence, reopening of assessment is liable to be quashed.
The ITAT Ahmedabad ruled in favor of an agriculturist, holding that once the assessee provides primary evidence for cash deposits, the burden shifts to the Revenue to provide contradictory evidence.
ITAT Jaipur held that disallowance of professional fees merely for the reason that notice under section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act remained unserved is not justifiable since assessee has placed various evidences on record. Accordingly, appeal is allowed.
Delhi High Court rules in favor of Central Plastics Pvt. Ltd., stating that taxpayers are not required to prove the “source of source” for share capital received before the 2012 amendment to Section 68.
Addition under section 68 for Long-term capital gains (LTCG) from sale of shares allotted pursuant to a demerger scheme as bogus and alleged that price manipulation based on a report from the Investigation Wing of the Income tax Department was not justified as the assessee proved genuineness by comprehensive documentary evidence.
The ITAT Delhi has upheld the deletion of a ₹11.73 Cr addition for unexplained cash credit, ruling that the Assessing Officer’s reliance on unverified STR information was insufficient to make the addition.
Mumbai ITAT deletes income additions for Asha Bhadra in penny stock case, citing SEBI report and judicial precedents confirming genuine share transactions.
ITAT Chandigarh sets aside tax addition against Amico Textiles, ruling assessment invalid due to AO’s failure to follow mandatory Section 153C procedure for seized documents.
ITAT Ahmedabad sends unexplained demonetization cash deposit case back to AO, granting assessee new chance to explain source after ex-parte order.
The Ahmedabad ITAT has deleted additions for unexplained investments and partners’ capital, ruling that the firm had provided sufficient proof of the partners’ creditworthiness.
