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 Chennai held that when cash is sourced out of recorded debtors, provisions of section 69A of the Income Tax Act could not be ...
Income Tax : M/s. GRR Holdings is a firm was incorporated on 31.01.2014 with two partners Shri Gaddam Shyam Prasad Reddy & Shri Syed Fayaz Moha...
Income Tax : ITAT Lucknow held that addition by calculating sales on hypothetical basis and completely ignoring various evidences submitted dur...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained money not legally sustainable since na...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 69 towards unexplained cash made by the AO without bringing any concrete evidence on ...
No Addition of Cash Deposit During Demonetisation Period under section 69A If Cash Deposit Is Part of Receipts Shown on Presumptive Basis and When the Part of Cash Deposit in Pre Demonetisation-Period Was Accepted.
Mere typographical error of the account number of the bank account does not mean that the assessee has not disclosed proper information about the bank account details. Addition u/s 69A unsustainable
Satyabhama Avadhanula Karimnagar Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) I find the Assessing Officer on the basis of inquiry conducted u/s 131(1)(d) made addition of Rs.22.00 lakhs being unexplained cash found from the possession of the assessee and made addition of the same u/s 69A rws 115BBE of the I.T. Act. I find the learned CIT (A) […]
Held that as the assessee was not able to furnish any evidence to the fact that the seized cash represent accounted income and also assessee has accepted that no proper cash books was maintained. Accordingly, addition u/s 69A sustained and also penalty leviable u/s 271AAA.
Swami Shibrupananda Jayrambati Ramkrishna Saradamath & Mission Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) Ld. AO had taken two views in respect of same transaction/bank deposits made by the assessee, one pre-demonetization period deposits, which he treated as income from profession of the assessee and 50% of such deposits treated as income from profession. On the other hand, […]
Explore the ITAT Hyderabad ruling in Sri Narsimha Reddy Pindi vs ITO case. Understand how past savings from rental and agricultural income validated the demonetization period cash deposit.
Madhusudan Dhakad Harda Vs ITO (ITAT Indore) If a person has only agricultural income and no other income, then no addition can be made to the total income unless and until the AO proves that the assessee has any other source of income which is taxable under the Income-tax Act. Since the agricultural sector in […]
Explore the ITAT Chennai resolution in the case of Shri Krishnapandian Balaji vs. DCIT regarding unexplained cash deposits during demonetization. Learn how the assessee justified the source as rental income.
Explore the Harpreet Singh Grover vs. ITO case at ITAT Amritsar. Analysis of cash deposit controversy, CIT(A) decision, and ITAT’s order for de novo adjudication.
Lateef Abdul Mohd. successfully challenges ITAT Hyderabad decision on cash deposit addition during demonetization, citing sales correspondence and legal precedent.
