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...
Mumbai ITAT rules that a retracted statement without nexus to the taxpayer cannot justify addition under Sec 69A, offering relief to the appellant in Mayur Kanjibhai Shah Vs ITO.
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.
Dive into the case of Pravinbhai Mumabhai Bharwad vs ITO as ITAT Ahmedabad annuls addition under section 69A, highlighting oversight of cash deposit proofs by AO and CIT(A).
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.
Chennai’s ITAT supports CIT(A)’s deletion of cash deposit additions under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, highlighting evidence-based judgment.
Read the detailed analysis of Shekhar Agarwal Vs ACIT case where ITAT Delhi deletes addition of diamond jewellery found during search proceedings. Full text included.
Kerala High Court dismisses writ petition challenging assessment order under Section 147 of the IT Act, directing appellant to pursue statutory remedy. Full judgment analysis.
Read the full text of the ITAT Chennai order in ACIT vs. Prakash Ferrous Industries Pvt. Ltd. where the assessment order is rejected due to oversight and typographical error under section 143(3).
ITAT Hyderabad orders fresh examination of Bollam Sampath Kumar Jewellers’ cash deposits and sales during demonetization, highlighting the importance of documentation.
Delhi ITAT’s landmark ruling in Sarika Bindal vs. ITO establishes that capital gains from share sales cannot be deemed sham, safeguarding taxpayer rights.
