Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
Income Tax : This guide explains when penalties can be imposed under various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It also outlines the appli...
Income Tax : ITAT held that additions based solely on third-party search material without independent evidence or cross-examination are invalid...
Income Tax : Income without satisfactory explanation is taxed at a special high rate under Section 115BBE. The provisions place strict liabilit...
Income Tax : A doctrinal analysis of unexplained cash credits, investments, and expenditure under Sections 68–69D. Explains burden of proof a...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai deleted a Section 69 addition after finding documentary evidence established joint ownership, source of funds, and ear...
Income Tax : ITAT held that a registered sale deed without corroborative evidence is not incriminating material and cannot support additions in...
Income Tax : ITAT held that multiplying a seized figure without supporting evidence was unjustified and restricted the Section 69 addition to t...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that proceedings initiated under the old Section 153C framework after the Finance Act, 2021 amendments were leg...
Income Tax : Tribunal held that omission to mention the exact charging provision did not vitiate the assessment where unexplained cash and bull...
The ITAT quashed a reassessment and deleted ₹13 crore in additions, ruling that the initial notice under Section 148 was invalid as it was time-barred.
The ITAT ruled that a CIT(A) must independently verify evidence before deleting a tax addition, even if the AO fails to provide a remand report.
The ITAT Raipur quashed the reopening of an assessment under Section 147, ruling that search-based cases on third-party material must be initiated under Section 153C.
The ITAT Raipur restores Section 10(10D) exemption, ruling the CPC exceeded its powers by making a complex adjustment on an insurance policy’s maturity proceeds.
The Chhattisgarh High Court has granted bail to Aman Kumar Agrawal, accused of fraudulently availing over ₹23 crore in GST input tax credit. The court cited the completion of the investigation and the accused’s cooperation.
Tribunal held that EDC paid to HUDA is a statutory levy and not interest, quashing disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) based on erroneous application of Section 194A.
ITAT Delhi held that revisionary proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act is not justifiable since proper enquiry and examination was made and therefore, there is no error in the order of the AO thus, it is not pre-judicial to the interest of the Revenue.
The Pune ITAT quashed a reassessment order, ruling that proceedings initiated under Section 147 were invalid. The tribunal held that information from a third-party search mandates proceedings under Section 153C, not Section 147.
Disallowance of ₹28,99,56,987/- towards finance costs on securitization transactions had no basis, as the interest income rightly belonged to the SPVs and not the assessee. Likewise, the addition of ₹1,61,82,000/- under section 69A read with section 115BBE was unjustified since the cash deposits in Specified Bank Notes represented genuine loan repayments from microfinance borrowers and could not be treated as unexplained.
ITAT Delhi held that applicability of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act without initially fixing the addition under any of the charging provisions i.e. section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D of the Income Tax Act is not tenable in the eye of law. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
