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...
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal {ITAT} Delhi set aside the CIT{A}’s order, remanding the addition of ₹5 crore under Section 68 back for fresh scrutiny. The issue revolves around Charan Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. receiving share capital at a high premium from 13 companies that the Assessing Officer (AO} suspected were paper companies due to unserved statutory notices.
The ITAT ruled that a claimed business loss on the sale of a scrip, allegedly part of a penny stock syndicate, was genuine and allowable. The ruling emphasized that transactions supported by complete documentation (contract notes, demat, bank statements) and where no tax-exempt capital gain was claimed cannot be disallowed merely based on a general modus operandi or third-party information.
ITAT annulled an assessment and addition of $\text{Rs. }31.80$ crore of share capital made under Section 153C, ruling that the jurisdiction was invalid for an unabated assessment year. The key takeaway is that for an already completed assessment, the AO must rely on incriminating material found during the search, not mere statutory documents already in the books.
ITAT upheld the deletion of a 25% bogus purchase addition, ruling that the AO cannot disallow purchases based merely on suspicion and circumstantial evidence when the audited books of account were not rejected. The key takeaway is that without finding defects or rejecting the books, and while accepting sales, disallowance of purchases is impermissible.
The ITAT held a reassessment under sections 144/147 void due to the absence of a mandatory 143(2) notice. Revenue’s claim that participation cures defects under 292BB was rejected, emphasizing strict compliance with statutory notice requirements.
The Tribunal confirmed that no disallowance under Section 14A can be made when the assessee earned no exempt income during the year. Following Calcutta High Court precedents, the ITAT rejected the Revenue’s attempt to apply the prospective Finance Act 2022 amendment to the relevant assessment year (AY 2014-15).
Drawing on precedents, the ITAT held that a mandatory Section 153D approval for search assessments must be proven. The assessment order was set aside because the Department could not locate or produce the JCIT’s prior approval and satisfaction note after eight years.
The Kolkata ITAT allowed Winner Tradecom Pvt. Limited’s appeal, deleting a ₹15 lakh addition made under Section 68 for an alleged credit from a shell company.
The Tribunal found the addition uncalled for. cash deposits from the sale of old vehicles, accepted as genuine sales by the AO, cannot be treated as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 merely for the absence of buyers’ PAN or address details.
DCIT Vs Hindustan Clean Energy Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) Project Terminated, Shares Worth Zero – ITAT Allows ₹68 Cr Capital Loss & Strikes Down 68 Addition A 90MW hydropower project was allotted by the Himachal Pradesh Govt. to HPPPL in 2009, which paid ₹18 Cr upfront fees. A project company MHEPCL was formed, shares were moved […]
