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 : The Tribunal held that reliance on third-party statements without granting effective cross-examination amounted to a violation of ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that an addition under Section 69A cannot be sustained when the assessee is denied the opportunity to cross-exami...
Income Tax : Income without satisfactory explanation is taxed at a special high rate under Section 115BBE. The provisions place strict liabilit...
Corporate Law : Details on Indian government's blocking of YouTube channels, citing IT Rules 2021 and Section 69A of IT Act 2000. Learn about reas...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore remanded a Section 69A addition after holding that an APMC commission agent's entire sale proceeds could not be tre...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore deleted the Section 69A addition after holding that member details established the source of cash deposits made dur...
Income Tax : ITAT held that negative cash balances do not automatically establish undisclosed income and upheld addition only to the peak negat...
Income Tax : ITAT held that penalty under Section 271D cannot survive where the Assessing Officer failed to record satisfaction in the assessme...
Income Tax : ITAT Allahabad held that estimating gross profit solely on the basis of the subsequent years GP rate is not justified after reject...
Income Tax : CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies...
ITAT Bangalore remanded a Section 69A addition after holding that an APMC commission agent’s entire sale proceeds could not be treated as income.
ITAT Bangalore deleted the Section 69A addition after holding that member details established the source of cash deposits made during demonetisation.
ITAT held that negative cash balances do not automatically establish undisclosed income and upheld addition only to the peak negative balance.
ITAT held that penalty under Section 271D cannot survive where the Assessing Officer failed to record satisfaction in the assessment order.
ITAT Allahabad held that estimating gross profit solely on the basis of the subsequent years GP rate is not justified after rejection of books. It directed estimation based on the average of preceding and succeeding years’ accepted trading results.
The Tribunal ruled that a penalty notice lacking a specific allegation of under-reporting, misreporting, or the applicable clause under Section 271AAB is legally defective. It held that such notices violate the requirement of providing a meaningful opportunity of defence.
Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Group and covered Assessment Years (AYs) 2020-21 to 2023-24. Although several legal grounds were initially raised, the assessees did not press those grounds during the hearing. Accordingly, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh, confined itself to deciding […]
ITAT confirmed the Section 69A addition after the assessee failed to produce evidence identifying the alleged farmers or explaining the source of ₹23 lakh.
ITAT remanded the matter after holding that the CIT(A) passed a non-speaking order without giving reasons or properly considering the assessee’s submissions.
The ITAT Ahmedabad held that merely describing a transaction as a loan by one party and a purchase advance by the other could not justify revision under Section 263. As the source of funds was explained and the amount was refunded, no addition under Section 69A was warranted.
