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 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.
