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...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that the assessee was covered under the search proceedings even though its name did not specifically appear in the...
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 : Assessing Officers should follow the sequence as noted below for applying provisions of section 68 of the Act: Step 1: Whether the...
ITAT Visakhapatnam held that unexplained cash credit under Section 68 must be netted off against business income to prevent double addition. The ruling ensures accurate assessment and fair taxation.
Cash deposits were rightly taxed as unexplained money when the assessee failed to discharge the primary burden of proof. Absence of contemporaneous evidence defeats claims of redeposit of cash.
ITAT Chennai held that the matter of buyback through High Court approved scheme of arrangment remitted back for verification of NAV valuation under rule 11UA and also to analyize applicability of section 115QA. Accordingly, appeal restored back.
The Tribunal ruled that increasing assessed income without issuing a notice under section 251 violates natural justice. The case was remanded as ex-parte enhancement beyond the original addition was found legally unsustainable.
Madras High Court held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained cash credit merely on the basis of certain statement without considering documentary evidence is not justifiable. Accordingly, writ of revenue is dismissed.
The ITAT held that land-levelling and fencing expenses are integral to acquiring agricultural land and qualify for section 54B deduction. The ruling clarifies what constitutes eligible investment despite restricting unregistered costs.
The issue was whether the AO could expand a limited scrutiny assessment into a complete scrutiny without approval. The ITAT held that such expansion is invalid without prior PCIT sanction.
The issue was whether unsecured loans could be treated as unexplained despite full documentation. The ITAT held that once loans are repaid and identity and genuineness are proved, section 68 cannot be invoked.
The ITAT held that reassessment under Sections 147/148 is invalid if based solely on investigation reports, emphasizing the need for independent AO satisfaction.
The reassessment was framed by NFAC before faceless powers under section 151A were notified. The ITAT held the entire reassessment without jurisdiction and quashed both reopening and addition.
