Income Tax : Discover the tax implications and rates for undisclosed sources of income under Sections 68-69D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Learn...
Income Tax : Explore the heavy tax implications on taxpayers for unexplained investments and expenditures under Income Tax Act sections 69 to 6...
Income Tax : Explore sections 68 to 69D of Income Tax Act 1961, covering unexplained cash credits, investments, and more. Learn about legal pro...
Company Law : Unlock the procedural intricacies of share buybacks in private/unlisted companies under the Companies Act, 2013. Explore the signi...
Income Tax : Explore the differences between income tax Sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C in India, their taxability, and implications. Understand...
Income Tax : Karnataka High Court held that settlement commission, accepting additional income offered as reasonable and giving immunity from p...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata held that CIT has not applied his mind analytically while assuming jurisdiction for taking cognizance under section 2...
Income Tax : Punjab & Haryana HC upholds Principal Commissioner’s revision under Section 263. Assessing Officer’s wrong Section 44ADA asses...
Income Tax : Certain expenses related to cost of improvement of land put forward by assessee were disallowed noting lack of proper and sufficie...
Income Tax : Notice under section 148 was issued upon assessee by AO for reassessing the cash deposit as undisclosed income, following approval...
The ITAT in Delhi has directed a re-adjudication in the case of Kishan Singh & Associates Vs ITO involving an addition made by AO under sections 69A and 115BBE of the Income Tax Act due to non-filing of ROI.
ITAT Delhi held that addition u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained investment untenable as source of investment made by the appellant stands sufficiently explained.
ITAT Amritsar held that in case of non-cooperation during conduct of special audit under section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, the time limit to do the same can be extended at the end of the department.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, in the case of Raj Kumar Vs ACIT, held that a S. 69 addition is not sustainable based on a mere delay in deposit during the demonetisation period.
CESTAT Chennai held that demand for extended period sustained as appellant collected service tax without registration and without filing of ST-3 returns and also failed to credit the amount collected into the Government account.
ITAT Delhi held that disallowance of genuine claim of depreciation merely because the depreciation figure is not reflected in column no. 45 of ITR is unsustainable in law. Action of lower authorities of disallowing the genuine claim of depreciation on a very flimsy reason is unjustified.
ITAT Indore held that addition u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act towards gifts received from family members unsustainable as receiving gift from family members, namely father and mother for personal use, do not require any special occasion.
ITAT Amritsar held that because of wrong allotment of two PANs, assessee cannot be set as a non-filer or undeclared of tax in the return of one PAN as income duly declared via other PAN. Matter remanded back.
ITAT Indore held that addition on the standalone basis of statement of assessee u/s 132(4) of the Income Tax Act cannot be held as sustainable in absence of collaborative evidence found in support of such addition.
ITAT Hyderabad held that CIT(A) wrongly deleted the addition as nature of entries found in the cash book which were not recorded in the day book was not considered.
