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 Patna remands case of unexplained ₹1.32 crore cash deposits to CIT(A) after assessee claims no tax liability due to low income. Fresh review directed.
ITAT Chennai deletes ₹5 crore addition u/s 68, holding assessee proved source of funds. Lease deposit deemed genuine, creditworthiness established.
ITAT Delhi dismisses Revenue’s appeal on cash deposits and liability cessation, citing CBDT’s monetary limits for tax disputes under Circular No. 09/2024.
It is submitted on behalf of assessee that he is engaged in the business of transportation and logistics services and such business is being conducted by the assessee in his personal capacity as well as in capacity of the Proprietor of “M/s Tanvi Roadways”.
Addition made under Section 69A for an alleged unexplained cash loan was not justified as assessee provided evidence of receiving the loan through banking channels and not through cash.
Assessee had satisfactorily explained the source of credits in his books and consequently, CIT(A) had rightly deleted the additions after relying on various judgments made by AO.
ITAT Raipur held that exemption under section 11 and section 12 of the Income Tax Act not admissible to assessee society due to non-furnishing of return of income as required u/s. 12A(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act.
When an assessee deposes on oath giving explanation of the reasons and circumstances for investment, the same could not be brushed aside on the basis of general principles of the modus operandi of bogus LTCG claims.
CIT (A) was right in its decision to delete the addition of Rs. 2.92 crore made by AO under Section 69B for alleged undervaluation of closing stock as the books of accounts was not rejected, therefore, the observation of AO that the same were not reliable.
ITAT Mumbai restored the matter of addition under section 68 towards agricultural income since all facts and records for sales are not brought on record. ITAT directed assessee to demonstrate that sales made to parties are genuine.
