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...
Anticipatory bail was denied to the accused involved in Rs. 425 crore GST fake billing case as there was necessity of custodial interrogation to unearth the full extent of the fraudulent network and modus operandi.
ITAT Surat held that addition of unexplained stock as unexplained investment u/s. 69 of the Income Tax Act upheld due to claim of closing stock was not supported by any verifiable evidences. Accordingly, ground of appellant dismissed.
The Mumbai ITAT ruled that a tax reassessment on alleged bogus capital gains was invalid, citing the lack of specific incriminating evidence found during the search.
ITAT Bangalore held that cash gifts received from relatives and friends during wedding cannot be treated as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Income Tax Act merely because each donor is not individually verified. Accordingly, addition directed to be deleted.
The ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of a taxpayer, stating that cash deposits were sufficiently explained by a positive cash book balance, shifting the burden of proof to the Revenue.
Ahmedabad ITAT deletes Rs. 8.01 lakh income addition based on third-party disclosure, emphasizing the need for independent evidence and cross-examination.
It was held that Long-term capital gains on sale of “penny” stocks could not be treated as bogus & unexplained cash credit if the documentation was in order & there was no allegation of manipulation by SEBI or the BSE.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that applying Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] of CBDT, a cash deposit of 2,50,000/- by an individual without business income should be treated as prima facie explained. Hence, addition u/s. 69 to that extent is not justifiable.
ITAT Pune allows a petrol pump owner’s appeal for statistical purposes, citing consultant’s lapse in communication and directing re-examination with fair opportunity due to best judgment assessment.
Additionally, any person summoned to the DGGI may request his statement to be recorded under CCTV surveillance, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Paramvir Singh Saini.
