Section 69C

Tax Treatment of Cash Credit U/s. 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D

Income Tax - This Article discusses Tax Treatment of Cash Credit,Unexplained investments, Unexplained money, Amount of investments not fully disclosed in books of account, Unexplained expenditure and Amount borrowed or repaid on hundi in cash under section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D respectively of Income Tax Act, 1961....

Read More
Sorry No Post Found

Addition based on mere statement of assessee which is retracted is not sustainable

CIT Vs Lavanya Land Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court) - The Tribunal considered the merits and once again, at great length. The particular argument revolving around the statement of Dilip Dherai and his answer to question No. 24 was also considered in paragraph 21 of the impugned order. Then, in paragraph 22, the Tribunal refers to the additions made und...

Read More

Defect in notice u/s 274 do not vitiates penalty proceedings; Addition for Bogus purchases U/s. 69C?

Earth moving Equipment Service Corporation Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (ITAT Mumbai) - Mere defect in the notice u/s 274 do not vitiates the penalty proceedings and no prejudice was caused to the assessee by non- marking of appropriate clause. Addition for Bogus purchases cannot be made under Section 69C as 'unexplained expenditure' if purchase are duly disclosed and payments are m...

Read More

Sec. 153C: Documents found during Search must belong to Assessee

CIT Vs M/s Arpit Land Pvt. Ltd. (Bombay High Court) - Requirement of Section 153C of the Act cannot be ignored at the alter of suspicion. The Revenue has to strictly comply with Section 153C of the Act. We are of the view that non satisfaction of the condition precedent viz. the seized document must belong to the respondent – assessee is a jurisdicti...

Read More

Entire Bogus Purchases cannot be added as undisclosed income

Ashwin Purshotam Bajaj vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai) - The conclusion of the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee has purchased material from some other dealers but quantitative reconciliation of the stock was duly done by the assessee of the sale and purchase and hence the profit element in this accommodation entries are to be added to the income cannot be fau...

Read More

Purchases cannot be treated as bogus based on mere statement of vendors

ACIT vs. Mahesh K. Shah (ITAT Mumbai) - The assessee, a civil contractor, filed his return of income for A.Y. 2010-11 on 25.09.2010 declaring income of Rs. 30,65,277/-. The case was taken up for scrutiny and the assessment completed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) vide order dated 14.03.2013 wherein the...

Read More
Sorry No Post Found

Recent Posts in "Section 69C"

Addition based on mere statement of assessee which is retracted is not sustainable

CIT Vs Lavanya Land Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court)

The Tribunal considered the merits and once again, at great length. The particular argument revolving around the statement of Dilip Dherai and his answer to question No. 24 was also considered in paragraph 21 of the impugned order. Then, in paragraph 22, the Tribunal refers to the additions made under Section 69C....

Read More

Defect in notice u/s 274 do not vitiates penalty proceedings; Addition for Bogus purchases U/s. 69C?

Earth moving Equipment Service Corporation Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (ITAT Mumbai)

Mere defect in the notice u/s 274 do not vitiates the penalty proceedings and no prejudice was caused to the assessee by non- marking of appropriate clause. Addition for Bogus purchases cannot be made under Section 69C as 'unexplained expenditure' if purchase are duly disclosed and payments are made through banking channels. The fact t...

Read More

Sec. 153C: Documents found during Search must belong to Assessee

CIT Vs M/s Arpit Land Pvt. Ltd. (Bombay High Court)

Requirement of Section 153C of the Act cannot be ignored at the alter of suspicion. The Revenue has to strictly comply with Section 153C of the Act. We are of the view that non satisfaction of the condition precedent viz. the seized document must belong to the respondent – assessee is a jurisdictional issue and non satisfaction thereof ...

Read More

Entire Bogus Purchases cannot be added as undisclosed income

Ashwin Purshotam Bajaj vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

The conclusion of the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee has purchased material from some other dealers but quantitative reconciliation of the stock was duly done by the assessee of the sale and purchase and hence the profit element in this accommodation entries are to be added to the income cannot be faulted . ...

Read More

Purchases cannot be treated as bogus based on mere statement of vendors

ACIT vs. Mahesh K. Shah (ITAT Mumbai)

The assessee, a civil contractor, filed his return of income for A.Y. 2010-11 on 25.09.2010 declaring income of Rs. 30,65,277/-. The case was taken up for scrutiny and the assessment completed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) vide order dated 14.03.2013 wherein the income of the assessee was determined a...

Read More

Mere failure to produce dealers would not make Entire Purchases ‘Bogus’

Shri Rupesh Chimanlal Savla Vs ITO 3(3) (ITAT Mumbai)

Simply because the Assessee could not produce the dealers, the entire purchases cannot be treated as bogus purchases. The Assessing Officer could have made further investigations to ascertain the genuineness of the transactions....

Read More

12.5% Addition justified in absence of direct one to one relationship between purchases and sales

Smt. Kiran Navin Doshi Vs Income Tax Officer (ITAT Mumbai)

Fact that direct one to one relationship between purchases and sales have not been established, I am of the view that estimation of 12.5% as profit embedded in impugned purchases shown from these tainted parties and adding the same to the total income returned, would meet the ends of justice. ...

Read More

Tax Treatment of Cash Credit U/s. 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D

This Article discusses Tax Treatment of Cash Credit,Unexplained investments, Unexplained money, Amount of investments not fully disclosed in books of account, Unexplained expenditure and Amount borrowed or repaid on hundi in cash under section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D respectively of Income Tax Act, 1961....

Read More
Posted Under: Income Tax | ,

Addition u/s 69 not sustainable in absence of any proof of investment by assesse: HC

CIT Vs Provestment Securities Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

Delhi High Court held In the case of CIT vs. Provestment Securities Pvt. Ltd. that we are inclined to agree with the Tribunal that the question whether an investment had been made or not is a matter of fact and the same cannot be presumed....

Read More

Addition cannot be made for mere non-submission of Purchase Bill

M/s. Palco Distributors Vs Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (ITAT Kolkata)

M/s. Palco Distributors Vs. JCIT (ITAT Kolkata) Only premise of the AO for making addition is that assessee could not produce purchase bills for a sum of Rs.21,72,083/- having 526 items. We find that the items are properly recorded means the assessee has explained the source of acquisition...

Read More
Page 1 of 212

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,483)
Company Law (3,411)
Custom Duty (6,609)
DGFT (3,449)
Excise Duty (4,043)
Fema / RBI (3,251)
Finance (3,456)
Income Tax (25,022)
SEBI (2,735)
Service Tax (3,281)

Search Posts by Date

September 2017
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930