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 Delhi remits case on Section 69A unexplained money addition of ₹11.45 lakh to CIT(A)/NFAC for re-examination. Directions issued for fresh adjudication.
ITAT Ahmedabad allows Pankajkumar Patel’s appeal for statistical purposes, remanding unexplained investment case to AO for reconsideration under Section 69A.
Summary of an appeal against a CIT(A) order confirming additions under Section 69A for AY 2017-18. Directions issued for de-novo proceedings.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition towards cash deposit in bank account u/s. 69A as unexplained liable to be deleted since assessee satisfactorily explained the source. Accordingly, addition deleted.
Solitary issue in the present appeal relates to the addition made to the income of the assessee on account of cash found deposited in the bank account during demonetization period remaining unexplained, amounting to Rs.10.00 lakhs.
ITAT Ahmedabad remands Krupal Patel’s case to AO for fresh assessment after issues with portal access and lack of representation.
ITAT Kolkata deletes Rs.52.25 lakh addition under Section 69A for unaccounted fees. Evidence proved the amount was properly accounted for in the trust’s records.
ITAT Ahmedabad rescinds ex-parte Rs.36L addition u/s 69A, directing reassessment with a chance for the assessee to explain financial records.
ITAT Surat held that addition towards cash deposited during demonetization restricted to 10% of total deposit since assessee fully substantiated the cash deposit showing sufficient withdrawal. Accordingly, appeal partly allowed.
ITAT Jaipur held that taxability of surrendered undisclosed income under section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act requires verification on the part of the AO. Accordingly, matter restored back to the file of AO.
