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 : This guide explains how unexplained cash credits under Section 68 and related provisions can attract steep taxation under Section ...
Income Tax : Income without satisfactory explanation is taxed at a special high rate under Section 115BBE. The provisions place strict liabilit...
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 Surat held that rural agricultural land falls outside Section 2(14), deleting capital gains and related additions....
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that gold deposit agreements produced after the survey, without contemporaneous evidence or book entries, coul...
Income Tax : A belated filing of Form 3CLA was a curable procedural defect and could not deprive an assessee of weighted deduction under sectio...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai held that loose sheets and estimates alone cannot justify an addition under Section 69B without independent corrobora...
Income Tax : The Chennai ITAT held that excess stock found during a survey could not be taxed as unexplained investment when it had been accoun...
Income Tax : CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies...
The Tribunal held that additions based solely on third-party statements and seized digital data cannot survive without allowing cross-examination. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after granting due opportunity to the assessee.
The Tribunal ruled that the enhanced tax rate under Section 115BBE cannot be applied retrospectively for demonetisation-period transactions. As the tax effect at normal rates fell below the monetary limit, the Revenue’s appeal was dismissed.
The lower authorities confirmed an addition without considering permissible valuation variation. The Tribunal held that ignoring the 10% tolerance under section 50C renders the addition invalid.
The Tribunal held that issuing a Section 143(2) notice is compulsory once a return is filed under Section 148. Absence of such notice vitiates jurisdiction and nullifies the reassessment.
Applying the test of human probabilities, the Tribunal ruled that unexplained abnormal sales could not be fully accepted. At the same time, absence of book defects warranted estimation instead of outright section 68 taxation.
The issue was whether an extrapolated SCO value could justify unexplained investment in the buyer’s hands. ITAT held that once the seller’s extrapolation was rejected, the buyer’s addition could not survive.
Madras High Court held that Settlement Commission doesn’t possess power to change the head of income and convert the undisclosed portion of income into income u/s. 699B. Further, Settlement application is bound to be rejected once Settlement Commission arrives at the conclusion that full and true disclosure is not done.
The issue was whether the appellate authority could delete a large unexplained investment without following Rule 46A. The Tribunal held that bypassing mandatory procedure invalidates the relief, and the matter must be re-examined.
Delhi ITAT ruled that purchases from paper companies cannot be treated as normal business expenses under Section 37(1). Fraudulent transactions with no goods delivered attract unexplained expenditure taxation under Section 69C and 115BBE.
The Tribunal held that revision cannot be based on alleged lack of enquiry when detailed verification was already done. A mere change of opinion does not justify section 263 action.
