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 ...
ITAT Kolkata remands case of Prakash Bhalotia to AO for fresh order, citing lack of opportunity to present evidence in AY 2017–18 case of unexplained cash deposits.
Assessment was completed at income of Rs.1,23,18,612/- against the returned income of Rs.3,76,740/- on account of unexplained cash deposited in the bank accounts amounting to Rs.1,19,41,872/-.
ITAT Jaipur held that when the cash found in books are more then physically found no further addition is required to be made in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, addition towards unexplained cash set aside.
ITAT Agra held that dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) merely because the assessee did not comply with the notices issued by CIT(A), without adjudicating issues arising in the appeal on merits, is not sustainable in the eyes of law keeping in view provisions of Section 250(6).
ITAT Ahmedabad upheld ₹70.95 lakh addition under Section 69A due to unexplained cash deposits during demonetization and non-compliance by the assessee.
ITAT Allahabad remands a case involving ₹33.29 lakh unexplained cash deposits back to AO due to a mix-up of assessment years by CIT(A).
ITAT Ahmedabad directs benefit of Rs. 8 lakhs for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization in the case of Manan Kiritbhai Shah for AY 2017-18.
ITAT Kolkata held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards unexplained cash deposits rightly deleted since it is already part of the turnover of the business. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
ITAT Delhi held that orders passed based on illegal assumption of jurisdiction on the basis of satisfaction note which was recorded without application of mind and quite in a mechanical manner is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, addition deleted.
Assessee didnot file return for the year under consideration. As per AIMS module information received that assessee has deposited the amount of Rs.16,84,100/- as cash during the demonetization period. Case was reopened notice was issued accordingly.
