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 Cochin remands case after CIT(A) dismisses appeal without considering additional evidence under Rule 46A in an unexplained mo...
Income Tax : ITAT Cochin remanded Baiju Kabeer’s case to CIT(A) for reassessment, citing lack of opportunity to explain cash deposits. Review...
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...
ITO Vs Rajesh Kumar Chhanalal Patel (ITAT Ahmedabad) Ahmedabad ITAT upholds CIT(A) order deleting the addition of Rs. 86.75 Cr under Section 69A as Assessee’s unexplained income; Holds that the cash deposited in bank account cannot be treated as unexplained as the Revenue himself in the remand report and on verification accepted that the entire […]
Nagappan Arunachalam Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The ld. CIT(A) has sustained an addition u/s 69A equal to 50% of the peak balance in HSBC accounts jointly held with the spouse. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the Appellant was not able to rebut the issues raised by the AO during remand proceedings as the […]
ITAT Amritsar held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act is beyond jurisdiction as the amount is already declared as turnover and the said turnover is reflected in the books of account.
Laxmi Narain Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) In the present case there is no dispute regarding the fact the assessee deposited Rs. 10,49,000/- in cash on 18.11.2016 during demonetization period and the AO picked up said amount for making addition in the hands of assessee u/s. 69A of the Act. From the copies of the order […]
Riya Sunil Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) A.O has come to the conclusion that cash deposited in the bank account of the assessee has no connection with tuition income received by her. Therefore, the AO treated the cash deposited during the demonetization period appearing in the bank account as unexplained money u/s 69A of the […]
Section 68 cannot be invoked if Assessee not required to maintain books of account. Section 115BBE comes into operation only in case of income referred in Section 68/69/69A/69B/69C and 69D
Explore the tax implications of undisclosed income from Section 68 to Section 69D. Learn about tax rates, explanations, and conditions to avoid penalties. A comprehensive guide for students.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that invocation of proceedings u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as AO has not put on record that material seized during the course of third party search belongs to the assessee.
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act sustainable on failure to provide reasonable explanation of the sources and justification of heavy denomination cash gifts.
ITAT upheld additions towards cash seized during search proceedings as unexplained money, under Section 69A when assessee could not establish source for amount found.
