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...
The issue was whether a reassessment could be framed in the name of a company that had ceased to exist due to amalgamation. ITAT held such an assessment void ab initio, quashing the entire proceedings.
The case examined whether general search statements can justify additions under section 68. The Tribunal held that without a cash trail or independent enquiry, such statements cannot override documentary proof.
The Tribunal upheld deletion of additions where loan repayments were sourced from stock sales and fresh loans. It ruled that without rejecting books or disproving records, section 68 cannot be invoked.
Emphasising settled law, the Tribunal ruled that properly documented loan transactions cannot be rejected without cogent contrary material. The CIT(A)s deletion of additions was therefore affirmed.
The Tribunal examined suspicion surrounding a large cash advance for property. It ruled that suspicion alone cannot replace evidence, and once the transaction is substantiated, section 68 addition must be deleted.
The Tribunal deleted both substantive and protective additions made across multiple years on the same alleged receipts. It held that such duplication results in impermissible multiple taxation of identical amounts.
The Revenue relied on ITS data to allege unexplained cash deposits. The Tribunal ruled that where cash books and stock registers are maintained without defects, such additions are unsustainable.
The case examined whether customer advances reported in service tax returns constituted taxable revenue. The Tribunal ruled that revenue accrues only on execution of conveyance deeds, and advances cannot be treated as under-reported turnover.
The Assessing Officer accepted multiple loan transactions but treated only one as unexplained. The tribunal held that selective rejection without consistent reasoning was unsustainable.
Holding in favour of the assessee, the Tribunal clarified that explained capital supported by documentary proof cannot be treated as unexplained income.
