Income Tax : Overview of Income Tax Sections 69A, 69B, on unexplained income, investments, and expenditures. Key cases and interpretations incl...
Income Tax : The Sections by which the assessees are suffering too much due to high pitched assessments passed by NFAC are from 68 to 69D and 1...
Income Tax : Recent Chennai ITAT decisions address unexplained income, underreporting, and penalties under Sections 69A, 68, 270A, and 271. Key...
Corporate Law : Assessees face 78% tax and 6% penalty for unexplained investments or expenditures under Sections 69 to 69C of Income Tax Act if de...
Income Tax : Learn about penalty provisions under the IT Act, including penalties for defaults in tax payment, income reporting, and more. Key ...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad dismisses Somnath Kelavni Mandal's income tax appeal due to continuous absence in proceedings. Case pertains to une...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai deletes additions under Section 69A for cash deposits made during demonetization by P. Tamilmani. Case highlights pro...
Income Tax : Additional income offered by assessee on account of cash and excess stock is liable to be taxed as business income and not unexpla...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai rules bad debt recovery as business income, deleting Rs. 1 crore addition under Section 69A. Read full details on the...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that loose sheets picked u/s 132, falls within definition of ‘document’ mentioned in section 132(4) and theref...
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.
ITAT Kolkata held that grants from the West Bengal State Government to cooperative societies are not income from other sources and eligible for deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
In the case of Srimathi Pichara Vs ITO, ITAT Hyderabad set aside ex-parte addition of cash deposits made during demonetization period under Section 69A of Income Tax Act. ITAT directed Assessing Officer to readjudicate the matter after providing an opportunity to assessee to produce relevant documents for fact verification
