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...
The issue was whether full bank deposits of a commission agent can be taxed as unexplained income. The ruling held only commission income taxable, with 8% estimation upheld as reasonable.
The Tribunal examined whether demonetisation cash deposits linked to recorded business sales could be taxed as unexplained income. It ruled that once the source is established through books, addition under Section 68 is unsustainable.
ITAT held that reassessment initiated with approval from the wrong authority is invalid when issued beyond three years. The entire proceedings were quashed. The key takeaway is that proper sanction under Section 151 is mandatory.
The Tribunal held that updated returns filed during ongoing assessment proceedings are not valid under Section 139(8A). The key takeaway is that taxpayers cannot correct returns once scrutiny has begun, though limited relief may still be granted.
The ITAT held that the PCIT cannot invoke revisionary powers when the same issue is already pending before the appellate authority. The case involved share transaction additions treated as penny stock.
The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to substantiate the source of cash deposits during demonetization. Mere disclosure in books was insufficient without proof of genuineness and credibility.
The Tribunal dismissed appeals after the assessee failed to appear despite multiple notices. Lack of participation led to confirmation of additions made by tax authorities.
ITAT confirmed that the amended 60% tax rate under Section 115BBE applies prospectively from April 2017 onwards. For earlier transactions, only the 30% rate applies, safeguarding taxpayers from retrospective burden.
The Tribunal held that member-based receipts may be exempt under the principle of mutuality. The matter was remanded to verify whether contributors and beneficiaries are identical.
The Tribunal held that CIT(A) cannot make a fresh addition without issuing an enhancement notice. Cash redeposits from explained loan withdrawals were accepted as genuine.
