Income Tax : This guide explains when penalties can be imposed under various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It also outlines the appli...
Income Tax : This guide explains how unexplained cash credits under Section 68 and related provisions can attract steep taxation under Section ...
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 : ITAT Kolkata deleted the Section 68 addition, holding that share application money already assessed in subscribers' hands cannot b...
Income Tax : Calcutta HC dismissed the Revenue's appeal after the remand report confirmed the disputed receipt was sale proceeds of investments...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held Section 68 cannot apply to sale proceeds of disclosed investments already recorded in books. Revenue's appeals wer...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held Section 68 inapplicable where shares were disclosed in an earlier year and sale proceeds were already offered as i...
Income Tax : ITAT Agra held Section 44AD could not apply where turnover exceeded the limit, adopted past profit history, allowed telescoping an...
Income Tax : CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies...
Income Tax : Assessing Officers should follow the sequence as noted below for applying provisions of section 68 of the Act: Step 1: Whether the...
The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to substantiate the source of cash deposits during demonetization. Mere disclosure in books was insufficient without proof of genuineness and credibility.
The issue was whether reassessment under Section 147 is valid after a search. The ITAT held it invalid, ruling that only Section 153A applies post-search, making the reassessment void.
ITAT held spousal gift taxable under Section 68 due to lack of evidence on genuineness, bank trail, and donor capacity despite Section 56 exemption.
The case examined whether bank deposits could be taxed as unexplained credits. The Tribunal held that Section 68 applies only to entries in books of account, leading to deletion of the addition.
The Tribunal held that protective additions cannot be sustained without establishing the assessee as the actual beneficiary of cash credits. It upheld deletion where ownership was not proven.
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer erred in fully rejecting the assessee’s explanation linking cash deposits to business sales. However, due to incomplete substantiation, a limited addition of ₹8 lakh was sustained.
The Tribunal held that GST collected is not part of income for presumptive taxation under section 44B. It ruled that GST is a statutory levy and cannot be treated as revenue.
The issue was whether share capital addition could be sustained without seized evidence. The Tribunal held that in absence of incriminating material, the addition under Section 68 is invalid.
The issue was whether additions could be made in unabated assessments without incriminating material. The Tribunal held that such additions are invalid, relying on Supreme Court precedent.
The issue was whether cash deposits from business sales could be treated as unexplained income under Section 68. ITAT held that recorded cash sales forming part of turnover cannot be taxed as unexplained credits.
