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...
In order to avoid unnecessary litigation, it is proposed to amend the provisions of the sub-section (2) of section 11 5BBE to expressly provide that no set off of any loss shall be allowable in respect of income under the sections 68 or section 69 or section 69A or section 69B or section 69C or section 69D.
Suspicion and doubt may be the starting point of an investigation but cannot, at the final stage of assessment, take the place of relevant facts, particularly where a deeming provision is sought to be invoked.
In the case of M/s Bhagwati Motors Vs. ITO Chandigarh bench of ITAT have held that Assessee merely acted as a conduit without any right in money, therefore, no addition under section 69A of the Act could be made against the assessee.
