Section 69C

Section 68, 69, 69A, 69B and 69C of Income Tax Act, 1961

Income Tax - Comparison between section 68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B and section 69C: -So far as section 68 is concerned, the onus is wholly upon the Assessee to explain the source of the entry. But in cases falling under section 69, 69A, 69B and 69C, the words used show that before any of these sections are invoked, the condition preceden...

Read More

Taxation of Unexplained Incomes

Income Tax - Background To begin with, the unexplained income simply means any income for which assessee do not have valid explanation about the nature and / or source or the assessing officer is not satisfied with the explanation provided by the assessee. Under the provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) broadly, the term ‘unexplained incomeâ€...

Read More

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,Section 69, Section 69A, Section 69B, Section 69C and Section 69D respectively of Income Tax...

Read More

Section 68: Provisions related to Cash Credits /Undisclosed Income

Income Tax - Section 68 incorporates only a rule of evidence, placing the onus of proof on the assessee. There have been hardly any amendments in this section since its introduction....

Read More

Budget 2018 Rationalises provisions of section 115BBE

Income Tax - Sub-section (2) of said section provides that no deduction in respect of any expenditure or allowance or set-off of any loss shall be allowed to the assessee under any provision of the Act in computing his income referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1)....

Read More
Sorry No Post Found

Section 69C Addition for bogus purchases – ITAT Allows 10% disallowance

Trushar Parimal Shah Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) - Trushar Parimal Shah Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) The addition in the present case was made under section 69C of the Act on account of unexplained expenses. Indeed, the primary onus lies on the assessee to justify the expenses claimed by him. However from the preceding discussion, we note that the assess...

Read More

Addition on matters not related to reasons recorded for reassessment based on fishing enquiry not valid

Anil K. Shah (Huf) Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) - Anil K. Shah (Huf) Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) In the case of Ranbaxy Laboratory Ltd. vs. CIT (supra), the Hon’ble High Court has explained the effect of Explanation 3 to section 147 inserted by Finance Act, 2009 which empowers the AO to assess the any income which comes to his notice subsequently even t...

Read More

100% Addition for Bogus Purchase not sustainable if Sales were accepted by AO

ITO Vs Vipul K Sheth (ITAT Mumbai) - ITO Vs Vipul K Sheth (ITAT Mumbai) In the present case the AO has not doubted the sales. The assessee could not establish the genuineness of the transaction to the satisfaction of the AO during assessment proceedings. Hence, from the facts of the case it can be concluded that assessee had made purch...

Read More

No section 36(1)(iii) disallowance unless Direct Nexus between Borrowed Funds & Capital Withdrawals

Lypsa Diamonds Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) - The issue under consideration is whether disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) made by AO forming an opinion that interest bearing funds were withdrawn from the firm being capital withdrawn by the partners and interest free advances is justified in law?...

Read More

ITAT Restricted Addition made by AO to 2% of Bogus Purchases

Surana Enterprises Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) - Surana Enterprises Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The issue under consideration is whether the addition made by AO u/s 69C by considering the purchases as Bogus Purchase is justified in law? ITAT states that, in present case, the assessee has shown sales of the goods, or otherwise the goods are lying in the cl...

Read More
Sorry No Post Found

Recent Posts in "Section 69C"

Section 69C Addition for bogus purchases – ITAT Allows 10% disallowance

Trushar Parimal Shah Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

Trushar Parimal Shah Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) The addition in the present case was made under section 69C of the Act on account of unexplained expenses. Indeed, the primary onus lies on the assessee to justify the expenses claimed by him. However from the preceding discussion, we note that the assessee has discharged his onus […]...

Read More

Addition on matters not related to reasons recorded for reassessment based on fishing enquiry not valid

Anil K. Shah (Huf) Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

Anil K. Shah (Huf) Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) In the case of Ranbaxy Laboratory Ltd. vs. CIT (supra), the Hon’ble High Court has explained the effect of Explanation 3 to section 147 inserted by Finance Act, 2009 which empowers the AO to assess the any income which comes to his notice subsequently even though no […]...

Read More

100% Addition for Bogus Purchase not sustainable if Sales were accepted by AO

ITO Vs Vipul K Sheth (ITAT Mumbai)

ITO Vs Vipul K Sheth (ITAT Mumbai) In the present case the AO has not doubted the sales. The assessee could not establish the genuineness of the transaction to the satisfaction of the AO during assessment proceedings. Hence, from the facts of the case it can be concluded that assessee had made purchases from grey […]...

Read More

No section 36(1)(iii) disallowance unless Direct Nexus between Borrowed Funds & Capital Withdrawals

Lypsa Diamonds Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

The issue under consideration is whether disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) made by AO forming an opinion that interest bearing funds were withdrawn from the firm being capital withdrawn by the partners and interest free advances is justified in law?...

Read More

ITAT Restricted Addition made by AO to 2% of Bogus Purchases

Surana Enterprises Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)

Surana Enterprises Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The issue under consideration is whether the addition made by AO u/s 69C by considering the purchases as Bogus Purchase is justified in law? ITAT states that, in present case, the assessee has shown sales of the goods, or otherwise the goods are lying in the closing stock. If […]...

Read More

Entire Purchase cannot be disallowed by Considering it as Bogus

Ilesh Amrutlal Gadhia Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

The issue under consideration is whether the disallowance u/s 69C of entire purchase amount by considering it as bogus is justified in law?...

Read More

100% of Bogus Purchase cannot be disallowed as Sales are linked with Purchases

ACIT Vs Rashmikant V. Shah (ITAT Mumbai)

The issue under consideration is whether the CIT is correct in restricting the disallowance u/s 69C against bogus purchase at rate of 12.5% of the bogus purchases?...

Read More
Posted Under: Income Tax |

Bogus Purchases: ITAT reduces addition to 2% of bogus purchases

Prateek Gupta Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

The issue under consideration is whether the addition made by CIT(A) on account of bogus purchases at rate of 12.5% of purchase u/s 69C is justified in law?...

Read More

Bogus Purchase: Addition on peal credit basis for Low Margin & Low Vat Rate Items unjustified

Ashok S Vakharia HUF Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

The issue under consideration is whether the CIT(A) is correct in confirming addition u/s 69C of the Act on account of unexplained purchases made during the year, calculated on the basis of peak credit?...

Read More

Section 69C- No addition on mere Sales Tax Department information

PCIT Vs Vaman International Pvt. Ltd. (Bombay High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether the Tribunal  was  justified in holding that provisions of section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are not applicable for assessee? ...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (5,124)
Company Law (6,841)
Custom Duty (8,182)
DGFT (4,434)
Excise Duty (4,421)
Fema / RBI (4,511)
Finance (4,737)
Income Tax (35,593)
SEBI (3,801)
Service Tax (3,651)

Search Posts by Date

January 2021
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031