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 ITAT Delhi ruled that Section 68 (unexplained cash credits) cannot be invoked against journal entry adjustments where no cash or equivalent funds flowed into the assessee’s account. The ₹10.51 Cr addition was deleted.
The ITAT Delhi sets aside a Rs.1.03 Cr addition to a trader’s income, ruling that the creditor balance cannot be taxed under Section 68 when the AO accepts the substantial volume of sales and corresponding purchases.
ITAT Delhi set aside an unexplained cash addition of ₹3.5 Lakh, ruling in favor of the assessee who received a gift from her adult daughter. The court accepted the daughters creditworthiness and the genuine nature of the transaction.
The ITAT Ahmedabad upheld the deletion of a ₹1.17 Lakh addition made under Section 68 for alleged penny stock gains, ruling that the taxpayer had incurred a Short Term Capital Loss and had not claimed any exempt LTCG u/s 10(38),
Delhi ITAT rules reassessment valid due to Assessee’s HC undertaking, but deletes Rs. 8.31 Cr addition, finding Revenue failed to prove raw material purchases were bogus.
ITAT Delhi dismisses Revenue appeal, holding an investor’s LTCG from stock exchange transactions as genuine, reaffirming “suspicion is not substitute for proof.”
ITAT quashes DCIT’s 153C assessments for Piyush Bongirwar, holding that a single diary page pertaining only to AY 2013-14 cannot justify assessment for later years without specific incriminating material.
Agra ITAT confirms deletion of Rs. 6.77 Cr addition u/s 68, ruling the scrap trader’s bank credits were fully explained by GST, loans, VAT refund, and internal transfers, backed by evidence.
Delhi High Court held that addition of demonetization cash deposit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained cash credit rightly deleted by CIT(A) since source of deposit duly explained with documentary evidence. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Bangalore ITAT restored a case involving Rs.1.49 crore in unexplained cash deposits for fresh assessment, directing the AO to re-examine the source and the CIT(A)’s application of the peak credit method.
