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...
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.
ITAT Ahmedabad refers Rs. 99.52 lakh addition under Section 69 to AO for fresh examination. Case pertains to unexplained loans in Dharmendrasinh Chudasama vs ITO.
ITAT Ahmedabad order in Maheshbhai Nagjibhai Desai Vs ITO case, addressing reopening under Section 147 and unexplained investments under Section 69.
ITAT Ahmedabad remands case on unexplained investments of ₹18.19L in land & shares. Tribunal directs re-examination by AO after Assessee presents evidence.
ITAT Nagpur held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act without providing an opportunity to assessee to cross-examine the person whose statement was relied upon is untenable in law and hence liable to be deleted.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition towards cash deposit in bank account u/s. 69A as unexplained liable to be deleted since assessee satisfactorily explained the source. Accordingly, addition deleted.
ITAT Jaipur held that taxability of surrendered undisclosed income under section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act requires verification on the part of the AO. Accordingly, matter restored back to the file of AO.
ITAT Delhi remands the case of Rs. 29.32 lakh unexplained investment back to CIT(A) due to inadequate reasoning and lack of detailed discussion.
