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 : This covers how unexplained credits and investments are taxed under Sections 68 to 69D. The key takeaway is that additions require...
Income Tax : ITAT held that section 69 cannot be invoked where purchases are duly recorded in books and paid through banking channels, making t...
Income Tax : The issue was whether a notice issued before filing of return satisfies Section 143(2) requirements. The Tribunal held such notice...
Income Tax : The issue was whether third-party diaries using code “DD” can justify 153C action. ITAT held that without clear identification...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that additions cannot be sustained without incriminating material directly connecting the assessee to alleged ca...
Income Tax : The ruling clarified that unverified electronic records and third-party statements cannot justify additions without proper verific...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held reassessment invalid as the alleged escaped income did not exceed ₹50 lakh required for extended limitation. I...
ITAT Delhi held that the assessee has duly explained the source of his share of the investment made in the property purchased. Accordingly, addition towards unexplained investment under section 69 of the Income Tax Act is directed to be deleted.
ITAT Pune held that once primary reason to believe that income had escaped assessment fails then AO doesn’t possess jurisdiction to tax any other income in reassessment order. Hence, re-assessment is unsustainable and liable to be quashed.
ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69 towards unaccounted gold and silver jewellery set aside relying on CBDT instruction no. 1916 dated 11.05.1994. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee allowed.
ITAT Raipur held that AO has passed the final assessment order u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 153B(b) of the Act without seeking a prior approval of the same by the Jt. CIT u/s. 153D of the Income Tax Act and hence the order so passed is liable to be quashed.
ITAT Ahmedabad sets aside ex-parte NFAC order but imposes ₹10,000 cost on the assessee for failure to justify non-compliance in the appellate stage.
Assessee didnot file ITR for AY 2012-13 during which assessee made cash deposit of Rs.45,69,722/-. The case was reopened and notice u/s 148 was sent through e-mail against which no ITR was filed. Hence, AO made addition u/s 69A.
Understand the applicability of Section 68 (cash credit) and Section 69 (unexplained investments) under the Income Tax Act with relevant case law examples.
ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69 towards unexplained investment merely based on loose sheets without any corroborative evidences is unsustainable in law. Also held that addition on the basis of mere assumption and presumption not sustainable.
Gauhati High Court held that arrest of accused involved in evasion of GST by falsely claiming ITC during investigation without any reason to believe that accused will abscond or disobey summons not justified. Accordingly, accused released on interim bail.
ITAT Jaipur held that when the cash found in books are more then physically found no further addition is required to be made in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, addition towards unexplained cash set aside.
