Income Tax : Discover the tax implications and rates for undisclosed sources of income under Sections 68-69D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Learn...
Income Tax : Explore the intricacies of gold taxation in India, covering physical gold, paper gold, gold derivatives, inheritance tax, and comp...
Income Tax : Explore the impact of demonetization on cash deposits in India and the key legal insights from Section 69A vs. Section 44AD cases....
Income Tax : Explore sections 68 to 69D of Income Tax Act 1961, covering unexplained cash credits, investments, and more. Learn about legal pro...
Income Tax : Explore the differences between income tax Sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C in India, their taxability, and implications. Understand...
Income Tax : ITAT Indore held that rejection of appeal by CIT(A) on the footing of non-payment of advance tax as required by section 249(4)(b) ...
Income Tax : Karnataka High Court held that settlement commission, accepting additional income offered as reasonable and giving immunity from p...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata held that CIT has not applied his mind analytically while assuming jurisdiction for taking cognizance under section 2...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune rules in favor of Ashok Ravsaheb Tambe, deleting addition of cash deposits during demonetization, explained as proceeds ...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune remands the case of Suhas Maruti Dhankude for re-adjudication due to non-adjudication of jurisdictional grounds and fail...
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of agreement which is not even signed without any corroborative material is unsustainable in law.
Shail Jayesh Shah Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) From the copy of the bank statement of Kotak Mahindra Bank, we find that assessee had deposited Rs.6 lakh in cash in 600 old currency notes of Rs. 1000 denomination on 01/12/2016. At a glance, it may appear that since the assessee had sufficient cash in hand amounting […]
Arvind Purseth Vs CIT(A) (ITAT Cuttack) It was submitted by the ld. Sr. DR that the only issue in the appeal of the assessee was that TDS had not been deducted in respect of payments made to M/s Sundaram Finance Ltd. and M/s Gulshan Freight Carrier. It was the submission that Form 26A had been […]
M. Vijayakumar Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) We noted that the CIT(A) has not doubted the source of maturity of assessee’s father FDs of Rs.8 lakhs which was withdrawn on 01.11.2016. Admittedly, the assessee made deposit on 10.11.2016 in cash, this amount of Rs.8 lakhs. The only dispute is confirmation, which now the assessee confirmed by […]
Narender Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) Undisputedly, in course of assessment proceeding, the assessee had explained the source of cash deposits in the bank account by stating that it was out of gift received from his grand-father Shri Phool Singh. The Assessing Officer, however, has rejected assessee’s claim as the notice issued under Section 133(6) […]
ITAT Delhi held that where the property is not recorded in the books of account and explanation about the nature and source of acquisition of property is not offered satisfactorily then value of such property would be deemed to be income under section 69A of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Delhi held that addition u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as cash deposit of INR 4.50 cr. is income under the scheme Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana (PMGKY) and the same is cleared by a valid declaration under the scheme.
ITAT Chennai held that addition for cash deposits out of marriage gift under section 69A partly deleted as in Indian Customs during marriages guests and relatives will give gift depending upon their social status and economic condition
Assessee, a retired bank employee earning pension, deposited Rs.15 lakhs cash in his bank account on 13.11.2016 which he explained as withdrawal on 13.10.2015 or a perceived need and kept the cash with him and the very same cash was deposited . AO rejected the explanation for the reason that the assessee failed to explain the perceived need for which cash was withdrawn holding that no prudent person would keep cash and lose interest if he deposits the money in FD. AO treated the cash deposit u/s 69A. CIT(A) confirmed the addition.
Asokan Meena Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) It is an admitted fact that the assessee has filed her return of income for the AY 2016-17 in ITR-4 and has maintained books of accounts, but for the AY 2017-18, she had filed return of income u/s.44AD of the Act, and estimated net profit without any books of […]
