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 Delhi held that provisions of section 68 or 69A of the Income Tax Act for cash deposit during demonetization period unjustified since source of cash deposits duly explained. Hence, addition liable to be deleted.
ITAT Mumbai rules in favor of B. Braun Medical India, deleting ₹2 Cr addition u/s 68, citing it as an advance payment, not unexplained credit.
ITAT Mumbai held that CIT(A) rightly deleted addition towards bogus purchases since assessee proved genuineness of purchases by submitting various details/ documents. Accordingly, appeal of the revenue dismissed.
ITAT Patna remands case of unexplained ₹1.32 crore cash deposits to CIT(A) after assessee claims no tax liability due to low income. Fresh review directed.
ITAT Chennai deletes ₹5 crore addition u/s 68, holding assessee proved source of funds. Lease deposit deemed genuine, creditworthiness established.
ITAT Delhi dismisses Revenue’s appeal on cash deposits and liability cessation, citing CBDT’s monetary limits for tax disputes under Circular No. 09/2024.
It is submitted on behalf of assessee that he is engaged in the business of transportation and logistics services and such business is being conducted by the assessee in his personal capacity as well as in capacity of the Proprietor of “M/s Tanvi Roadways”.
Addition made under Section 69A for an alleged unexplained cash loan was not justified as assessee provided evidence of receiving the loan through banking channels and not through cash.
Assessee had satisfactorily explained the source of credits in his books and consequently, CIT(A) had rightly deleted the additions after relying on various judgments made by AO.
ITAT Raipur held that exemption under section 11 and section 12 of the Income Tax Act not admissible to assessee society due to non-furnishing of return of income as required u/s. 12A(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act.
