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...
Claim of assessee cannot be rejected on mere doubt without bringing any material on record to suggest that this is only accommodation entry.
ITAT Held that addition on the basis of the opening balance of unsecured loan treating the same as current year transaction by invoking section 68 of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable.
R.S. Diamonds India Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) The Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has deposited a sum of Rs. 45 lakhs into its bank account during demonetization period. It was explained that the above said amount represented cash balance available in its books of account, which included advance received from the customers […]
Held that addition u/s. 68 and 69A unsustainable as evidences relating to cash deposited submitted and not doubted by AO and also books of account of the assessee are also not rejected u/s 145(3).
Held that the re-assessment and addition of the duly accounted cash sales of the assessee as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 by the AO without rejection of the books of account of the assessee u/s 145(3) of the Act is unjustified
Held that assessee failed to explain identity and creditworthiness of the creditors and genuineness of the transaction. Accordingly, addition u/s 68 sustained.
Vishwanath Ramchandra Panvelkar Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) We notice that the AO has expressed doubt only on the MOU entered by the assessee with M/s Samarth Enterprises, since it was not registered. However, the AO is placing reliance on the very same MOU to express the view that the assessee should have forfeited the advance […]
Mukesh Bhoormal Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Assessing Officer observed that the scrip in which assessee traded was proved to be insignificant, bogus, without business fundamentals and required the assessee to prove the genuineness of the same. In reply assessee vide letter dated 11.12.2017 submitted that the long term capital gain generated was genuine stating […]
Sneh Developers Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) As per the AO, the assessee has not filed return of income and hence notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been issued owing to cash transactions exceeding Rs.10,00,000/-. The AO held that the assessee has not given any details with regard to the […]
DCIT Vs Shree Swaminarayan Infrastructure Private Limited (ITAT Rajkot) In this case, assessee company has issued shares of Rs.2,92,00,000/-being 7300 equity shares of Rs.10/- each at a premium of Rs.3990/- per share and thus there is increase in share capital of Rs.73,000/-. Over and above that the company has collected premium of Rs.2,91,27,000/-. Before the […]
