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...
Income Tax : Explains the centralization of digital platforms, surveillance powers, and opaque governance. Key takeaway: citizens have limited ...
Income Tax : Detailed overview of penalties under various sections of the Income Tax Act, covering defaults in tax payment, reporting, document...
Income Tax : An overview of Sections 68-69D of India's Income-tax Act, which empower tax authorities to assess unaccounted income from unexplai...
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 Indore held that appellate order violated principles of natural justice after finding that key hearing notices were sent to a...
Income Tax : ITAT Rajkot held that cash deposits made during demonetization were fully supported by audited books of account, cash books, and b...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that addition of Rs. 13 lakh under Section 69A through rectification proceedings exceeded the scope of Section...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that the reassessment notice issued on 26.07.2022 was beyond the permissible timeline under the surviving limita...
Income Tax : Tribunal dismissed a Revenue appeal after finding that additions were made solely on basis of entries in a seized Excel file. It h...
Naresh Chandra Kalwani Vs PCIT case discusses excess stock, business assessment, and the applicability of section 69/69A/115BBE under Income-tax Act.
Delhi High Court held that benefit of deduction under section 80IC of the Income Tax Act available even in case of addition of unsubstantiated share capital into the account of the assessee under Section 68 of the Act.
Read the full text of the ITAT Bangalore order on Aijaz Ahmed Suri Vs ITO regarding demonetization deposits. Analysis and conclusion included.
Analysis of Satbir Mahato Vs PCIT case by Kolkata ITAT, highlighting the dispute over Section 263 jurisdiction due to plausible views of AO.
Mool Chand Aggarwal Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) CIT(A) cannot disbelieve cash book only on the ground that ‘generally individuals do not maintain cash book and it is not mandatory to maintain cash book for the individual’.
ITAT Delhi in Preeti Bhardwaj Vs ITO held that AO cannot treat cash deposits as unexplained when assessee has provided the source of cash deposits being cash withdrawals without bringing adverse material.
Read about the ITAT Ahmedabad’s decision in the case of Vivekkumar S Bhavsar vs ITO, where the matter was remanded back to the AO due to lack of cooperation from the assessee. A cost of Rs. 5000 was imposed on the assessee, payable to the Prime Minister National Relief Fund.
Delhi High Court dismisses Revenue’s appeal, ruling photocopy of sale agreement insufficient evidence for income addition. Analysis & judgment explained.
ITAT Delhi held that the reopening of assessment had been initiated by mere surmise and conjecture without having any cogent material to form a reasonable belief that income of the assessee had escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act.
Madras High Court held that even if AO of both searched person and other person is same, for completing Assessment proceedings and passing the Assessment order has to be calculated from the date on which the documents were handed over or deemed to have been handed over to the AO of the “other person”.
