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...
Merely because building was used by assessee-trust without consideration that cannot be said to be, in any way, any unexplained investment by assessee-trust justifying addition under section 69
Dashrathbhai Shivabhai Chaudhary Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) The assessee is engaged in farming and trading of milk and seeds. As per the information made available, the assessee made cash deposit of Rs. 21,95,000/- with Saving Bank Account. Being agricultural and the agricultural income is exempt the assessee did not file any return of income under […]
Understand the implications of unexplained investments and expenditures under sections 69 to 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with a focus on the 84% tax rate. Ensure meticulous documentation to avoid deemed income and penalties.
Merely, because the assessee’s PAN number was mentioned as he was the Director of one of the company, the purchase cannot be said to be made by him when the purchase has been shown in the P&L account by the said company itself as well as part of the closing stock of the said company, namely, Iscon Procon Pvt. Ltd.
ITAT Delhi held that addition of unexplained investment under section 69 of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of loose sheet alone without any other corroborative evidence is unsustainable in law.
AO made additions on ground that cash deposited in bank account was more than total turnover declared by assessee, since assessee furnished bank statements which showed that there were deposits and withdrawals of almost equal amounts and AO failed to give any findings regarding said withdrawals, assessee deserved to get benefit of telescoping and thus, addition was unjustified
Revenue could not controvert the fact that there has been frequent deposits and withdrawals by the assessee out of his saving bank account. No evidence is available on record suggesting that the money as withdrawn by the assessee was used for any other purpose.
Vishnunarayan R. Modani Vs CIT (A) (ITAT Mumbai) Assessee has not furnished any material to show that the share transactions entered by him are genuine transactions. Accordingly, I am of the view that the Assessing Officer was justified in treating the capital gain of Rs.136,812/- and Rs.150,575/- as income under the head ‘income from other […]
Sunita Chaudhry Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) We find that SEBI vide interim order dated 19/12/2014 and 11/08/2015, inter-alia, restrained 154 entities, including the assessee, from accessing the securities market and buying, selling or dealing in securities, either directly or indirectly, in any manner, till further directions, pending investigation in the script of in case of […]
Dive into Anuradha Pandey’s case vs. ITO (ITAT Varanasi). ITAT’s scrutiny on investment source from closing stock and debtors. Analysis of the disputed addition and its resolution
