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...
Recent Chennai ITAT decisions address unexplained income, underreporting, and penalties under Sections 69A, 68, 270A, and 271. Key cases provide insights into tax disputes.
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.
