Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
Income Tax : This guide explains when penalties can be imposed under various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It also outlines the appli...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that reliance on third-party statements without granting effective cross-examination amounted to a violation of ...
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...
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 Bangalore remanded a Section 69A addition after holding that an APMC commission agent's entire sale proceeds could not be tre...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore deleted the Section 69A addition after holding that member details established the source of cash deposits made dur...
Income Tax : ITAT held that negative cash balances do not automatically establish undisclosed income and upheld addition only to the peak negat...
Income Tax : ITAT held that penalty under Section 271D cannot survive where the Assessing Officer failed to record satisfaction in the assessme...
Income Tax : ITAT Allahabad held that estimating gross profit solely on the basis of the subsequent years GP rate is not justified after reject...
Income Tax : CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies...
Pune ITAT upholds ₹35.92 lakh penalty u/s 270A for misreporting income by a Diagnostic Centre proprietor. Admission of unaccounted cash receipts only after tax survey detection was not considered voluntary disclosure.
Bangalore ITAT in Suthakar Selvaraj vs. ITO deletes unexplained cash addition for a salaried employee, ruling that mere presumptions about cash withdrawal and re-deposit habits cannot be a basis for addition under the Income-tax Act when bank statements show sufficient withdrawals.
Bangalore ITAT restored a case involving Rs.1.49 crore in unexplained cash deposits for fresh assessment, directing the AO to re-examine the source and the CIT(A)’s application of the peak credit method.
Chennai ITAT deleted a Rs.12.36 lakh cash deposit addition under Section 69A for a retired government employee, acknowledging retirement benefits and customary household savings as sufficient sources.
ITAT Kolkata deleted the ₹1.31 lakh unexplained cash addition during demonetisation, ruling the deposit was reasonably sourced from the assessee’s disclosed rental income received in cash.
ITAT Ranchi deleted a ₹10.42 lakh addition on cash deposits during demonetization, holding they were explained from prior bank withdrawals.
ITAT Bangalore held that non-compliance with tax notices due to notices being sent to wrong email IDs and the demise of the assessee’s Chartered Accountant constitutes sufficient cause. The issue was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication
Bangalore ITAT restricted the s.69A unexplained cash addition for non-filer Umesh Babu to the peak credit of Rs.12.25 lakhs, rejecting the Rs.ｹ57.10 lakhs addition.
CIT(A)/NFAC had dismissed appeal alleging no submissions; ITAT noted documents were filed and directed fresh consideration, upholding principles of natural justice.
ITAT Delhi upholds the quashing of s. 153C assessment for AY 2012-13, ruling it’s beyond the 10-year block of limitation as per s. 153A/C and Delhi High Court precedent in Ojjus Medicare.
