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...
Income Tax : Recent Chennai ITAT decisions address unexplained income, underreporting, and penalties under Sections 69A, 68, 270A, and 271. Key...
Income Tax : Learn about penalty provisions under the IT Act, including penalties for defaults in tax payment, income reporting, and more. Key ...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore reverses addition of ₹12 lakh under Section 68, accepting sales as the source of cash deposits made during demone...
Income Tax : ITAT Raipur held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act justifiable since no plausible explanation provided fo...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that when the sale consideration as per conveyance deed and circle rates are different, matter must be referred to...
Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur held that addition of the amount already recorded as cash sales cannot be treated as unexplained cash deposits under s...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition, treating share application money as unexplained income, based on surmises and conjectures witho...
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 Chennai overturns addition of Rs. 28.57 Lacs for cash deposits by Gouthamchand Jain, ruling the source as valid and directing a reassessment.
ITAT Bangalore held that both AO and First Appellate Authority failed to conduct examination of cash deposit during demonetisation period in the light of CBDT instructions and hence matter remanded to that extent.
ITAT Delhi held that assessments completed u/s. 153A, making addition u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, without any incriminating material found during the search action is unsustainable in law. Accordingly, addition deleted.
ITAT Ahmedabad orders deletion of Rs. 34.3 lakh addition under Section 68, citing deposits from known sources. Case remanded for further verification.
Since the addition pertained to the “receipt of money” from the sale of flats by the assessee and these amounts did not represent the actual receipts in the hands of the assessee, they could not be subjected to tax.
Since there was no failure on the part of assessee to fully and truthfully disclose material facts therefore, assessment under sections 147-148 was not valid as the specific provisions of Section 153C were deemed to take precedence over the general provisions of Section 147.
ITAT Raipur held that tax implication of the gift transaction shall arise in the year in which the said asset will be sold/transferred. Thus, addition based on the notional / fictitious entry of asset made in books of account unjustified.
Delhi High Court held that passing of fresh assessment order beyond time limit prescribed under section 153(3) of the Income Tax Act cannot be sustained and hence set aside.
ITAT Pune held that addition in respect of share capital not sustainable as no incriminating material found during course of search regarding non-genuine share capital. Accordingly, addition towards the same deleted.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that ex-parte dismissal of appeal on account of non-appearance by CIT(A) without discussing the merits of the case is unsustainable in law. CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of appeal on merits.
