Section 69

Section 68, 69, 69A, 69B and 69C of Income Tax Act, 1961

Income Tax - Comparison between section 68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B and section 69C: -So far as section 68 is concerned, the onus is wholly upon the Assessee to explain the source of the entry. But in cases falling under section 69, 69A, 69B and 69C, the words used show that before any of these sections are invoked, the condition preceden...

Read More

Taxation of Unexplained Incomes

Income Tax - Background To begin with, the unexplained income simply means any income for which assessee do not have valid explanation about the nature and / or source or the assessing officer is not satisfied with the explanation provided by the assessee. Under the provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) broadly, the term ‘unexplained incomeâ€...

Read More

Theory of telescoping in determining taxability of undisclosed income

Income Tax - This article deals with the theory of telescoping as applied in the Income-tax Law, the manner of its application and as to how and under what circumstances the benefit of telescoping could be claimed / availed by an assessee. Though the said theory has general applicability across the taxability of a wide range of items, […]...

Read More

Budget 2018 Rationalises provisions of section 115BBE

Income Tax - Sub-section (2) of said section provides that no deduction in respect of any expenditure or allowance or set-off of any loss shall be allowed to the assessee under any provision of the Act in computing his income referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1)....

Read More

No Set off of losses against deemed undisclosed income

Income Tax - In order to avoid unnecessary litigation, it is proposed to amend the provisions of the sub-section (2) of section 11 5BBE to expressly provide that no set off of any loss shall be allowable in respect of income under the sections 68 or section 69 or section 69A or section 69B or section 69C or section 69D....

Read More
Sorry No Post Found

Section 69: Entire purchases cannot be added as bogus

ITO Vs Abhay Kantilal Shah (ITAT Mumbai) - ITO Vs Abhay Kantilal Shah (ITAT Mumbai) In instant case, as mentioned earlier, the assessee has filed before the AO copies of (i) bank statements for the financial year 2010­11, evidencing the payments made to these parties; (ii) ledger account of all the parties; (iii) purchase invoices from thes...

Read More

AO cannot invoke Section 68 merely for Unsatisfactory Explanation from Assessee

Ashish Sumatibhai Shah Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmadabad) - Assessing Officer is not obliged to invoke Section 68/s.69 of the Act in every case where the explanation offered is found to be ‘unsatisfactory’ in the opinion of the Assessing Officer....

Read More

ITAT Restricts addition for Bogus Bills at 5% of bogus purchases

Suresh Mehta HUF Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) - The issue under consideration is whether the CIT(A) is correct in confirming the addition made by AO for non-genuine and bogus purchases by applying profit rate at the rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases?...

Read More

Section 68 Addition not Justified for Unexplained Deposit in Bank Account

Dirisala Bala Murali Vs ITO ( ITAT Visakhapatnam) - The issue under consideration is whether the AO is justified in making addition u/s 68 towards alleged unexplained deposit in the bank account in as much as a bank account is not a book of account maintained by the appellant?...

Read More

No section 68 Addition for URD Purchase supported with Strong Evidences

Baser Ahmed Sisodia Vs ITO (Supreme Court) - The issue under consideration is whether claim to purchase of goods by the assessee could be dealt with u/s 68 of the Income Tax as a cash credit, by placing burden upon the assessee to explain that the purchase price does not represent his income from the disclosed sources?...

Read More
Sorry No Post Found

Recent Posts in "Section 69"

Section 69: Entire purchases cannot be added as bogus

ITO Vs Abhay Kantilal Shah (ITAT Mumbai)

ITO Vs Abhay Kantilal Shah (ITAT Mumbai) In instant case, as mentioned earlier, the assessee has filed before the AO copies of (i) bank statements for the financial year 2010­11, evidencing the payments made to these parties; (ii) ledger account of all the parties; (iii) purchase invoices from these parties and (iv) sale invoices as [&he...

Read More

AO cannot invoke Section 68 merely for Unsatisfactory Explanation from Assessee

Ashish Sumatibhai Shah Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmadabad)

Assessing Officer is not obliged to invoke Section 68/s.69 of the Act in every case where the explanation offered is found to be ‘unsatisfactory’ in the opinion of the Assessing Officer....

Read More

ITAT Restricts addition for Bogus Bills at 5% of bogus purchases

Suresh Mehta HUF Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

The issue under consideration is whether the CIT(A) is correct in confirming the addition made by AO for non-genuine and bogus purchases by applying profit rate at the rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases?...

Read More

Section 68 Addition not Justified for Unexplained Deposit in Bank Account

Dirisala Bala Murali Vs ITO ( ITAT Visakhapatnam)

The issue under consideration is whether the AO is justified in making addition u/s 68 towards alleged unexplained deposit in the bank account in as much as a bank account is not a book of account maintained by the appellant?...

Read More

No section 68 Addition for URD Purchase supported with Strong Evidences

Baser Ahmed Sisodia Vs ITO (Supreme Court)

The issue under consideration is whether claim to purchase of goods by the assessee could be dealt with u/s 68 of the Income Tax as a cash credit, by placing burden upon the assessee to explain that the purchase price does not represent his income from the disclosed sources?...

Read More

No section 69 addition for Cash Deposit in Bank as POA holder for Sale of Property of Father

Kum. Kavitha R Vs. ITO (ITAT Bangalore)

The issue under consideration is whether the addition u/s 69 for Cash deposited in assessee’s bank account being Power of Attorney holder for sale of property belong to her father is justified in law?...

Read More

Section 69 addition not justified if Assessee Explains source of Deposits in Bank based on Cash Book

ACIT Vs Dr. Anil Kumar Verma (ITAT Agra)

The issue under consideration is whether the addition made u/s 69 by AO due to undisclosed sources of cash deposits in bank account is justified in law?...

Read More

Asking to prove 92% of expense defeats purpose of presumptive taxation: ITAT Bangalore

Shri Kokkarne Prabhakara Vs. ITO (ITAT Bangalore)

Shri Kokkarne Prabhakara Vs. ITO (ITAT Bangalore) Asking the assessee to prove to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, the expenditure to the extent of 92% of gross receipts, would also defeat the purpose of presumptive taxation as provided under section 44AD of the Act or other such provision. Since the scheme of presumptive taxati...

Read More

Loose papers cannot be classified as ‘incriminating material’ unless AO establishes nexus

Mani Square Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata)

For instance, scribbling or rough notings found on loose papers cannot be straightaway classified as ‘incriminating material’ unless the AO establishes nexus or connect of such notings with unearthing of undisclosed income of the assessee. This nexus or connect has to be brought out in explicit terms with corroborative material or evi...

Read More

If section 69 not invoked by AO in Order u/s 143(3) then section 115BBE can’t invoked for rectification u/s 154

ACIT Vs Shri Sudesh Kumar Gupta (ITAT Jaipur)

whether CIT(A) is justified in quashing the action of the AO u/s 154 of the Act in applying provision of section 115BBE of the IT Act on undisclosed investment surrendered during the course of survey proceedings?...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (5,117)
Company Law (6,813)
Custom Duty (8,170)
DGFT (4,430)
Excise Duty (4,421)
Fema / RBI (4,502)
Finance (4,731)
Income Tax (35,535)
SEBI (3,797)
Service Tax (3,648)

Search Posts by Date

January 2021
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031