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...
Addition made under Section 69A based only on statements and a pen drive that were never tested or corroborated was not justified as such evidence could not be treated as credible unless the taxpayer was confronted with it and given an opportunity to respond.
The ITAT Visakhapatnam has directed the Income Tax Officer to verify the source of a Rs. 24 lakh cash deposit made during demonetization by Tripuraneni Sarada Devi.
Mumbai ITAT remands Shankarlal Shantilal Mali’s appeal on unexplained cash deposits of over 1 crore for AY 2014-15 to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
ITAT Hyderabad rules against double taxation, quashing Section 69A addition after cash source was already accepted and taxed under Section 269SS for the same amount.
A Comprehensive Analysis of Undisclosed Incomes under Sections 68 to 69D of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Taxation of these Incomes Under Section 115BBE and Penalty Provisions under Sections 271AAC & 271AAD With Insights on Explained vs. Unexplained Income, Judicial Precedents & Finance Act, 2025 Amendments 1. Introduction & Legal Context. The robust and equitable functioning […]
ITAT Nagpur rules against arbitrary 10% cash deposit addition under Section 69A, stating no income can be deemed if explanations are credible.
Chennai ITAT remands a case involving Rs 6.16 crore in unexplained cash deposits by a cooperative society, allowing a fresh adjudication after non-compliance, with a cost of Rs 5,000.
Ahmedabad ITAT directs tax authorities to re-verify V N Exports’ books for demonetization cash deposits, citing prior rulings on cash sales by jewelers. A key verdict on unaccounted income.
ITAT Jaipur held that addition under section 68 towards cash deposit in bank as unexplained cannot be sustained since source of cash deposited duly explained. Accordingly, addition of around Rs. 8.60 Crores deleted.
ITAT Pune held that entire cash deposits into the bank account cannot be treated as income, only profit element embedded in the same should be brought to tax. Thus, addition adopting 8% profit rate confirmed. Appeal of assessee is partly allowed.
