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...
In our opinion, the assessee is having no explanation with regard to generation of scraps and sale of the same. In our opinion, it is only a make-believe story so as to account the unaccounted cash generation by assessee. In view of this, we do not find any merit in the argument of the learned Counsel for the assessee.
Where assessee-firm claimed to have received unsecured loans during relevant years, however, it could not prove genuineness of unsecured loan taken and underneath sources for making these investments, addition made by Assessing Officer under section 68 was justified
ITAT held that merely for not producing the cash creditors before the Ld. AO even when all the necessary documents as required to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the cash creditors are furnished by the assessee, cannot be a reasonable basis to make addition for unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act.
PCIT Vs Arshia Global Tradecom Private Limited (Calcutta High Court) In the case on hand the reassessment proceedings, the assessee was unable to justify the genuineness of the transactions. The assessee failed to produce original cash memos and bills for the sales alleged to have been effected and to substantiate the cash deposit into their […]
Ashim Kumar Mahanta Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) The undisputed fact is that in this case Rs.27,68,700/- has been found deposited in the joint account of assessee as well as his wife in the savings bank account of Axis Bank. When confronted by the AO after reopening the assessment, according to the assessee, this amount was […]
Held that deeming provisions of section 115BBE doesn’t apply as source of income clearly explained and established by the assessee
Held that assessee established identity of the creditors by bringing on record their PANs and complete addresses of the creditors. Hence addition u/s 68, without bringing out any adverse or cogent material to dispute the credit worthiness of the creditors and genuineness of the transactions, is unsustainable
Held that addition u/s 68 unsustainable as all the necessary documentary evidences in support of genuineness of share capital submitted by the assessee.
Held that since the receiver has failed to establish the creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the transaction, addition u/s. 68 as unexplained cash credit sustainable.
Section 263 cannot be invoked to correct each and every type of mistake or error committed by the AO; it is only when an order is erroneous as also prejudicial to Revenue’s interest, that the provision will be attracted.
