Income Tax : ITAT Chennai rules unaccounted customer deposits, with traceable identities and commercial substance, are liabilities, not income ...
Income Tax : Penny stocks, often associated with small, illiquid companies, have been a subject of concern due to their susceptibility to price...
Income Tax : Learn about unexplained cash credits under Section 68, tax implications, key legal cases, and compliance requirements to avoid pen...
Income Tax : Understand the applicability of Section 68 (cash credit) and Section 69 (unexplained investments) under the Income Tax Act with re...
Income Tax : The Sections by which the assessees are suffering too much due to high pitched assessments passed by NFAC are from 68 to 69D and 1...
Goods and Services Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that GST would not form part of gross receipts for the purposes of computing presumptive income under Section 44B...
Income Tax : Thereafter, there was change in incumbent and fresh opportunity was provided and notice u/s.142(1) was issued. But this notice was...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act by treating LTCG as bogus merely on the basis of assumption a...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that revisionary proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act not invocable as assessment made by AO af...
Income Tax : The JDA was signed between one Mr. U.K. Hasanabba and Mr. U. Ibrahim on one side as landowners and Mr. Abdul Khader K (on behalf o...
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 Delhi held that addition under section 68 towards unexplained income rightly deleted as no adverse incriminating material/ document found in the premises of the searched person. Accordingly, appeal of the revenue dismissed.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act made towards penny stock deleted since assessee duly discharged the onus cast upon him and there is no adverse order/penalty order against the Assessee.
The Assessing Officer (hereafter AO) had made an addition to the income as returned by the respondent under Section 68 of the Act and disallowed the addition made under Section 14A of the Act.
The writ petitioner company is non-deposit taking Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC) having license from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for functioning as a Micro Finance Institution (MFI) registered with RBI.
AO observed that there was substantial undisclosed income, as the assessee admitted to unaccounted business income amounting to Rs.3,50,04,000/- during the search proceedings but did not file a return for the assessment year 2014-15.
The CIT(A) has also not given any independent finding after verifying that whether there is an actual syncronised trading between the assessee and that of company scrip i.e. M/s. Radhe Developers Ltd.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that appeal filed by the revenue is liable to be dismissed since the alleged accommodation entries are not entered by the assessee and no contrary evidences proving the same has been produced by the revenue.
The AO proceeded to treat the transactions as penny stock and relying on the investigation report on penny stock from the Investigation Wing, he disallowed the same u/s 68 of the Act to the extent of Rs.1,28,58,450/-.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69 of the Income Tax Act on protective basis not justified since assessee established genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of entity from which share application money is received.
No deduction under the Head “Provident Fund” is permissible in the above provisions and I therefore, hold that the taxable value of Rs.22,93,296/- for which deduction has been claimed by the party is part of the value of taxable services and is not allowed.
