Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that an addition under Section 69A cannot be sustained when the assessee is denied the opportunity to cross-exami...
Income Tax : Income without satisfactory explanation is taxed at a special high rate under Section 115BBE. The provisions place strict liabilit...
Income Tax : Explains the centralization of digital platforms, surveillance powers, and opaque governance. Key takeaway: citizens have limited ...
Income Tax : Detailed overview of penalties under various sections of the Income Tax Act, covering defaults in tax payment, reporting, document...
Income Tax : An overview of Sections 68-69D of India's Income-tax Act, which empower tax authorities to assess unaccounted income from unexplai...
Corporate Law : Details on Indian government's blocking of YouTube channels, citing IT Rules 2021 and Section 69A of IT Act 2000. Learn about reas...
Income Tax : ITAT Indore held that appellate order violated principles of natural justice after finding that key hearing notices were sent to a...
Income Tax : ITAT Rajkot held that cash deposits made during demonetization were fully supported by audited books of account, cash books, and b...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that addition of Rs. 13 lakh under Section 69A through rectification proceedings exceeded the scope of Section...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that the reassessment notice issued on 26.07.2022 was beyond the permissible timeline under the surviving limita...
Income Tax : Tribunal dismissed a Revenue appeal after finding that additions were made solely on basis of entries in a seized Excel file. It h...
The ITAT ruled that an employee cannot be taxed on cash deposits that are found to be the employer’s funds, remanding the case for verification of the end-use of the money.
In a case against an 82-year-old retired LIC officer, the ITAT Bangalore deletes a ₹15.30 lakh addition, accepting past cash withdrawals as a valid source for demonetisation deposits.
ITAT Bangalore rules that unexplained cash deposits in a bank account cannot be taxed without verifying sources like agricultural income and small business sales, remanding the case for re-examination.
The ITAT Delhi upheld the deletion of a ₹39.83 crore addition to Santosh Trust, ruling that its cash deposits during demonetization were explained by regular fee collections
ITAT Delhi: Cash deposits in a dissolved firms bank account are taxable only in the proprietors hands, not the partnerships. The protective addition was deleted.
Mumbai ITAT rules cash withdrawn before demonetization is not unexplained, deleting a ₹23 lakh addition. The tribunal partly upheld the disallowance of agricultural income.
ITAT Delhi: Addition on expensive watches deleted. The court held they belonged to the entire Kochar family, and possession was consistent with their status.
Assessee had recorded the cash deposits as sales in the audited books of account, and no discrepancies were found by AO or CIT(A). Failure to provide PAN alone could not be the sole reason to treat the sales as unexplained money, particularly when Aadhaar details were submitted.
Chhattisgarh High Court rules cash-in-hand from a preceding year’s balance sheet cannot be taxed as unexplained money under Section 69A in a subsequent year.
Additions made under section 69A against assessee for Assessment Years (AYs) 2011-12 to 2018-19 was deleted as proceedings initiated on the basis of seized documents which did not mention assessee’s name were unsustainable.
