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 : Income without satisfactory explanation is taxed at a special high rate under Section 115BBE. The provisions place strict liabilit...
Income Tax : ITAT held spousal gift taxable under Section 68 due to lack of evidence on genuineness, bank trail, and donor capacity despite Sec...
Finance : The Supreme Court upheld a Will executed in favour of the testator’s sister despite objections from his wife and children. The C...
Income Tax : Tribunal reiterated that credits brought forward from earlier financial years cannot ordinarily be taxed under Section 68 in subse...
Goods and Services Tax : Allahabad High Court ruled that while authorities could verify documents during transit, absence of an e-Tax Invoice did not confe...
Income Tax : The Tribunal observed that the assessee had repaid the unsecured loan along with interest after deducting TDS and the lender had o...
Income Tax : Tribunal ruled that future projections under DCF method cannot be tested solely against later actual financial performance. It obs...
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 Mumbai held that GST would not form part of gross receipts for the purposes of computing presumptive income under Section 44BB of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee allowed.
Thereafter, there was change in incumbent and fresh opportunity was provided and notice u/s.142(1) was issued. But this notice was returned back with the remarks that “the assessee was not in given address”.
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.
The JDA was signed between one Mr. U.K. Hasanabba and Mr. U. Ibrahim on one side as landowners and Mr. Abdul Khader K (on behalf of the assessee) and Mr. K. Hussain Abbas (on behalf of the HNGC Builders and Developers).
ITAT Jodhpur partly allows appeal in Kishana Ram vs ITO, upholding additions related to capital discrepancies and agricultural income under Section 143(3).
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that Chartered Accountant certificate stated that duty incidence has not been passed on to the customers. Hence, refund cannot be rejected by brushing aside Chartered Accountant certificate without any cogent reason.
ITAT Chandigarh cancels income tax reassessment of Manjeet Singh, citing lack of jurisdiction and procedural errors by the Assessing Officer.
ITAT Mumbai held that the very basis of which the Assessing Officer formed the belief that the income liable to tax is escaped assessment was based upon incorrect understanding of the facts and is, therefore, not sustainable in the eyes of law.
ITAT Chennai rules on Sakthi Realty case, deleting additions for unexplained deposits. Details on customer deposits, tax assessment, and tribunal’s decision.
