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...
AO noted that the assessee was unable to satisfied the ingredients of section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Thus, AO applied section 68 and added into total income and applied tax rate as per section 115BBE of the Act. Accordingly assessed income was determined at Rs.75,49,764.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that claim of exemption u/s. 10(38) on sale of shares rightly disallowed as assessee failed to prove genuineness of transaction and long-term capital gain on sale of shares was an arranged affair to convert its own unaccounted money.
ITAT Delhi held that External Development Charges (EDC) is an advance collected to provide common facilities and other services to the prospective flat owners. Since, the same is collected on approval of HUDA, it cannot form part of Profit and Loss Account. Accordingly, addition towards the same rightly deleted.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that restriction of addition to Rs. 1.45 crore from Rs. 9 crore towards unexplained cash credit on account of share application money by CIT(A) justified as the same was based on evidences.
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that an appeal to the High Court from a decision of the Tribunal lies only when a substantial question of law is involved. Appeal dismissed in absence of substantial question of law.
ITAT Delhi held that addition towards undisclosed investment in shares and unsecured loans merely based on observation made by DCIT without independent inquiry by AO is unjustified and hence the addition is liable to be deleted.
ITAT Delhi held that addition based on reliance placed on third party statement without any corroborated evidence is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, issue restored to AO for de novo adjudication.
ITAT Chennai overturns addition of Rs. 28.57 Lacs for cash deposits by Gouthamchand Jain, ruling the source as valid and directing a reassessment.
ITAT Bangalore held that both AO and First Appellate Authority failed to conduct examination of cash deposit during demonetisation period in the light of CBDT instructions and hence matter remanded to that extent.
ITAT Delhi held that assessments completed u/s. 153A, making addition u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, without any incriminating material found during the search action is unsustainable in law. Accordingly, addition deleted.
