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...
Karnataka High Court held that appellate jurisdiction against the reassessment order u/s. 39(1) of Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 [KVAT Act], cannot be equated with the jurisdiction conferred u/s. 69 of KVAT Act to seek rectification.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards cash deposits as unexplained money cannot be sustained since the cash deposits is already recorded in books of accounts. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
The ITAT Surat has remanded an appeal by Pankajbhai Devrajbhai Soliya to the CIT(A) for merits-based adjudication, citing an inadvertent email oversight as the cause for delay, imposing a ₹15,000 cost on the assessee.
ITAT Ahmedabad voids reassessment notice, stating if likely to escape income is below Rs. 50L after basic analysis, it’s barred by limitation under Section 149.
Delhi ITAT remands Tejasvi Bhalla’s Rs. 7 Cr income addition under Section 69 to AO, mandating verification of capital and stock balances for clarity.
ITAT Mumbai rules cash deposits in SBNs during demonetization, with explained sources, cannot be treated as unexplained income, citing judicial precedents.
ITAT Hyderabad held that addition under section 69 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained investment sustained since documents seized is incriminating in nature. Accordingly, appeal of assessee dismissed.
ITAT Delhi held that cost of incurred in furnishing the flat is allowable as cost of improvement and the capital gain is to be calculated accordingly. Thus, appeal of the assessee is allowed.
The matter was examined on the GST Portal, and it was verified that several consignments were delivered in two-wheelers, three-wheelers or cars. The registration numbers of many vehicles declared to have transported the goods from outside the State were found to be fake.
Chennai ITAT ruled a time gap between cash withdrawals and deposits doesn’t justify income addition under Section 69. Assessee proved source from prior withdrawals, overturning unexplained income assessment.
