Income Tax : Income without satisfactory explanation is taxed at a special high rate under Section 115BBE. The provisions place strict liabilit...
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...
Income Tax : A Comprehensive Analysis of Undisclosed Incomes under Sections 68 to 69D of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Taxation of these Incomes Un...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai rules unaccounted customer deposits, with traceable identities and commercial substance, are liabilities, not income ...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT held that investments in immovable properties cannot be treated as unexplained once payments are made through disclosed...
Income Tax : Madras High Court held that a reference to the District Valuation Officer was valid because the Assessing Officer had effectively ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that prolonged non-payment of interest and repeated amendments to loan agreements justified benchmarking AE loans...
Income Tax : The ITAT Hyderabad held that additions for alleged cash payments cannot be sustained merely on the basis of third-party seized doc...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that excess stock found during survey had direct nexus with business operations. It ruled that such income shoul...
Discover the ITAT Chennai verdict on Santhilal Jain Vijay Kumar Vs ITO, addressing taxation on excess stock and unexplained marriage expenses. Read the full case analysis.
Understand Parmod Singla Vs ACIT (ITAT Chandigarh) case on excess stock surrendered during survey and its tax implications under Sections 69, 69A, and 115BBE.
Read the detailed analysis of the ITAT Chandigarh verdict on DDK Spinning Mills vs DCIT, focusing on the implications of Section 69B and 115BBE of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chennai rules in favor of Revathi Modern Rice Mill, determining that excess stock is assessable as business income, not unexplained investment under Sec. 69B.
The ITAT Bangalore ruled that income tax additions can’t be based solely on unsubstantiated loose slips, emphasizing the need for corroborative material evidence.
Analysis of Kundal Raghubir Bhandari Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) case reveals flaws in assessment based on unverified third-party statements. Learn more about this significant legal ruling.
Delhi High Court held that benefit of deduction under section 80IC of the Income Tax Act available even in case of addition of unsubstantiated share capital into the account of the assessee under Section 68 of the Act.
ITAT Chandigarh held that excess stock found during the course of survey cannot be brought to tax under the deeming provisions of section 69B of the Income Tax Act as the same is undeclared business income and not unexplained investment.
ITAT Chandigarh held that addition invoking the deeming provisions of section 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income Tax Act unjustified as nature and source of undisclosed income/ investment duly explained by the assessee.
ITAT Delhi held that “full value of consideration” or “cost of investment” cannot be substituted by the fair market value (FMV), except in the case falling within the purview of 50C and Sec. 56(l)(vi)/(vii) of the Income Tax Act.
