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...
Explore the ACIT Vs Zodiac Transport case as ITAT Delhi directs fresh adjudication on protective additions, influenced by the SVP Group entities recent partial relief.
Explore the case of Nitin Madhukar Rathi vs. DCIT at ITAT Pune involving unsecured loans and unexplained cash deposits. CIT(A) partially grants relief, but Rs. 38,00,000 addition confirmed.
Explore the U Toll Corporation Ltd vs ACIT case (ITAT Varanasi) on unsecured loans. Analysis of loan discrepancies, cash deposits, and the ITAT decision.
Explore the case of ITO vs. Shreeji Multitrade Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) involving unexplained cash credits. Detailed analysis of scrutiny, appeals, and the burden of proof in section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
Explore ITAT Mumbai decision in ITO vs. Gama Entertainment Systems Pvt. Ltd. Understanding Section 68 implications on share premium. Full analysis and conclusion.
Prathamika Krushi Pattina Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) In the instant case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that sources for making deposit of Rs.36.36 lakhs by the assessee whoo is a primary agricultural credit co-operative society into its bank account are the money collected from its members. The AO is also not […]
Sanjeev Gajendra Pancholi Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) Perusal of the above gift deed shows that the donor viz. Shri Narendra Maganbhai Pancholi has sold piece of agriculture land from 28.3.2008 to 30.3.2008 and one agriculture land on 26.7.1999 aggregating to Rs.11,64,698/-. The donor claimed that this amount has been invested in private bank, shroff and […]
ACIT Vs Anand Jayantilal Kharbhari (ITAT Surat) We note that addition of unsecured loans of four parties totaling to Rs.3,65,00,000/- was made by the assessing officer only for want of Income Tax Returns. The assessing officer had mentioned in the assessment order about the confirmation and other details filed but because scrutiny selection through CASS […]
DCIT Vs Tirupati Udyog Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) It is the case of the assessee that Section 68 applies only to the credit/ receipts entered in the books during the Financial Year in question and its operation is not extended to other assessment years. This position is fortified by plethora of judicial precedents including CIT vs. […]
Sumo Advertises Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) A perusal of the assessment order reveals that during the course of the assessment proceedings, the Id. AO asked the appellant to establish the credits appearing in its books of account. However, no details were filed by the latter. As per the provisions of section 68, the […]
