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...
Calcutta High Court held that petitioner not put to notice in respect of addition made under section 69A of the Income Tax Act as notice was issued making addition u/s. 68. Accordingly, the same is violative of principles of natural justice.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that co-owners are to be treated as independent service provider for calculating threshold limit of exemption under Notification Nos. 6/2005-ST dated 01.03.2005 and No. 8/2008-ST dated 01.03.2008.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act justified as revenue duly exhibited the credit entry as sham or bogus and assessee failed to establish genuineness of the same.
Explore the detailed case of Sankpal Developers vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) regarding the treatment of unsecured loans under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Understand the implications of proving creditworthiness and genuineness in tax assessments.
Read the detailed analysis of ITO Vs Neetaben Snehalkumar Patel (ITAT Ahmedabad) where Section 254(2) was scrutinized for rectification versus recall of orders.
Dhanpat Raj Khatri Vs ITO (ITAT Jodhpur) If the explanation based on accounts supported by affidavit is not controverted, no addition should be made.
Gujarat High Court quashes Income Tax reassessment notice against Deepak Natvarlal Pankhiyani HUF, citing lack of fresh evidence supporting income escapement from stock trading.
Explore the full text of the ITAT Ahmedabad order where Neo Structo Construction Pvt. Ltd. successfully challenges a ₹3 Cr addition by ACIT. Detailed analysis provided.
Read the full text of the ITAT Kolkata order in Keshav Shroff Vs ITO (AY 2016-17). Analysis shows why mere suspicion isn’t enough for an IT notice.
Read ITAT Kolkata’s full text order on Sachdev Steel Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO. Learn why old loans converted into share allotment were deemed legitimate under the Income Tax Act.
