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 : 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 : Courts have clarified that purchases cannot be disallowed without proper evidence. Genuine transactions supported by documents can...
Income Tax : ITAT remanded the matter after holding that the CIT(A) passed a non-speaking order without giving reasons or properly considering ...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata held that extensive documentary evidence, audited books, supplier confirmations and banking records established the g...
Income Tax : The ITAT Kolkata held that the reassessment was invalid because the ACIT lacked pecuniary jurisdiction and completed the assessmen...
Income Tax : The ITAT Ahmedabad held that the assessee had discharged its burden under Section 68 by producing confirmations, PAN, bank stateme...
Income Tax : The ITAT Mumbai held that Section 69C cannot be invoked where expenditure is duly recorded in the books and its source is fully ex...
Income Tax : CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies...
Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Group and covered Assessment Years (AYs) 2020-21 to 2023-24. Although several legal grounds were initially raised, the assessees did not press those grounds during the hearing. Accordingly, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh, confined itself to deciding […]
ITAT remanded the matter after holding that the CIT(A) passed a non-speaking order without giving reasons or properly considering the assessee’s submissions.
ITAT Kolkata held that extensive documentary evidence, audited books, supplier confirmations and banking records established the genuineness of the purchases. It deleted the estimated addition sustained by the Commissioner (Appeals).
The ITAT Kolkata held that the reassessment was invalid because the ACIT lacked pecuniary jurisdiction and completed the assessment without lawful transfer of the case. The reassessment order was set aside.
The ITAT Ahmedabad held that the assessee had discharged its burden under Section 68 by producing confirmations, PAN, bank statements and income-tax records. The Revenue’s additions were deleted as no contrary evidence was produced.
The ITAT Mumbai held that Section 69C cannot be invoked where expenditure is duly recorded in the books and its source is fully explained. It deleted the addition relating to royalty, commission, and technical service payments.
ITAT Guwahati held that additions could not be sustained where the transactions related to a separate partnership firm with a different PAN and different partners. The Tribunal deleted the additions due to lack of evidence linking those transactions to the assessee.
The ITAT held that an untested third-party statement, without supporting evidence or cross-examination, cannot form the sole basis for imposing penalty under Section 271D. It deleted the penalty after finding the Revenue failed to establish the alleged cash loan.
This guide explains when penalties can be imposed under various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It also outlines the applicable penalty amounts for different types of tax defaults and compliance failures.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that repayment of the entire loan with TDS-compliant interest payments undermined the allegation that the loans were accommodation entries. The additions towards interest and commission were deleted.
