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 Pune held that when no addition has been made on account of which the case was reopened, the Assessing Officer cannot make any other addition without issuing a fresh notice u/s 148 of the Act.
ITAT Kolkata rules in favor of Kishore Trading Co., declaring the reassessment under Section 147 invalid due to lack of independent verification.
ITAT, by going through established precedents, held that AO had not recorded any dissatisfaction with assessee’s voluntary disallowance, nor had he provided any basis for invoking Rule 8D
ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that mere suspicion cannot justify tax additions, deleting an Rs. 18 lakh addition in a property investment dispute.
ITAT Mumbai removes addition in Kamal Clearing & Forwarding case, ruling that income was already declared and no evidence of money laundering was found.
ITAT Lucknow held that cash deposits out of the past savings during demonetization being reasonable and as per social standing of the assessee is justifiable. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee allowed and addition is directed to be deleted.
ITAT Bangalore held that delay in cash deposits, during demonetization, due to unforeseen circumstances like laxmi pooja and staff vacations post deepavali doesn’t imply fabricated income or an afterthought explanation. Hence, addition liable to be deleted.
ITAT Kolkata held that mere non-production of director cannot be the ground for making any addition in the hands of assessee under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, appeal of the revenue dismissed.
ITAT Ahmedabad sets aside assessment order on demonetization cash deposits, citing natural justice violations. Case remanded for fresh adjudication.
ITAT Chennai sends case back for reassessment as the assessee was not given a final opportunity to explain cash deposits in bank accounts for AY 2012-13.
