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...
In a recent case, the ITAT Hyderabad held that the provisions of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act are not applicable when the source of income is disclosed.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition u/s 115BBE of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as present case doesn’t involve invocation of any of the sections i.e. section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C & 69D of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained cash credit unsustainable as cash proceeds already reflected in Profit & Loss account, hence addition u/s 68 will amount to double taxation.
ITAT Mumbai held that once the transaction is duly recorded in the books of accounts and due explanation with regard to source of loan transaction is provided, addition u/s 69A towards unexplained money unsustainable.
ITAT Amritsar held that revisionary order under section 263 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as AO accepted the deal of sale of agriculture land with a conscious and independent application of mind.
In Ram Kishan Vs ITO case, ITAT Delhi ruled that no addition u/s 69A of Income Tax Act when income source was appropriately explained during assessment.
ITAT Amritsar’s decision in the case of Hari Chand Vs ITO. The appeal challenged the addition of unexplained cash deposits and undisclosed interest income. The ITAT remitted the case back to the AO for further adjudication, emphasizing the need for proper verification and a reasonable opportunity for the assessee. Gain insights into the grounds raised by the assessee and the arguments presented by both parties in this case.
ITAT Pune’s verdict in the case of Jayashri Shrikant Deshmukh Vs ACIT, underlining the importance of plausible explanation in cases involving Section 69A of the IT Act.
ITAT Mumbai held that reassessment proceedings u/s 148 within limitation period specified under section 149(1) of the Income Tax Act is valid and sustainable in law.
ITAT Chennai quashed a penalty on cash payment of defaulted EMI, arguing that case presented a ‘reasonable cause’ under Section 273B.
