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 Guwahati held that the exemption of 10(26) of the Income Tax Act is available to the individual members of the Scheduled Tribe and that this benefit cannot be extended to a firm which has been recognized as a separate assessable person under the Income Tax Act.
The Tribunal recognized the mandate under section 250(6), requiring the appellate authority to state points in dispute and provide reasons for its decision. However, the Commissioner’s order lacked adherence to these requirements, rendering it unsustainable.
ITAT Chandigarh held that excess stock found during the course of survey cannot be brought to tax under the deeming provisions of section 69B of the Income Tax Act as the same is undeclared business income and not unexplained investment.
Read the ITAT Delhi’s decision in Mudita Chaturvedi Vs ACIT case, where the addition of jewellery under section 69 is deleted, citing it as Stri Dhan from parents.
ITAT Delhi held that reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act based on reason to suspect unsustainable as AO failed to demonstrate live link between tangible material and formation of reason to believe that income had escaped assessment.
ITAT Chandigarh held that addition invoking the deeming provisions of section 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income Tax Act unjustified as nature and source of undisclosed income/ investment duly explained by the assessee.
New Delhi ITAT rules that no addition can be made under Sec 69 if the difference in stock found during survey and recorded in books is reconciled. Detailed analysis of Ultimate Creations Vs ACIT.
ITAT Delhi directs deletion of derivative loss addition, ruling that proper banking channel payments were made. Details of the case explained here.
ITAT Bangalore held that addition under section 69 of the Income Tax Act unjustified as source of fund duly explained. Rejection of the explanation relating to source of fund by the department without sufficient reason is unsustainable in law.
ITAT Delhi held that genuineness and veracity of the party cannot be doubted merely because the cold storage rent was received in cash. Accordingly, addition u/s. 69 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained investment unjustified.
