Income Tax : Discover the tax implications and rates for undisclosed sources of income under Sections 68-69D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Learn...
Income Tax : Explore the heavy tax implications on taxpayers for unexplained investments and expenditures under Income Tax Act sections 69 to 6...
Income Tax : Explore sections 68 to 69D of Income Tax Act 1961, covering unexplained cash credits, investments, and more. Learn about legal pro...
Income Tax : Explore the differences between income tax Sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C in India, their taxability, and implications. Understand...
Income Tax : Explore the implications of taxation under section 115BBE, including misuse of sections 68 to 69D, consequences of high tax rates,...
Income Tax : Karnataka High Court held that settlement commission, accepting additional income offered as reasonable and giving immunity from p...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata held that CIT has not applied his mind analytically while assuming jurisdiction for taking cognizance under section 2...
Income Tax : Punjab & Haryana HC upholds Principal Commissioner’s revision under Section 263. Assessing Officer’s wrong Section 44ADA asses...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition u/s. 68 on account of unexplained cash credit, being bogus unsecured loan, and u/s. 69C on accou...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition merely on the basis of retracted statement without any incriminating material seized from assess...
Gujarat High court held that reasons recorded while issuing notice u/s 148 was that capital gain on sale of property was not reflected in return and hence income has escaped assessment. However, factually, capital gain was already reflected in the return and hence it cannot be said that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and hence reopening unsustained.
ITAT Mumbai held that reasonable amount of addition should be made in case of bogus purchase. Accordingly, CIT(A) has justifiably made addition on the reasonable estimate basis @ 5% of the bogus purchase.
In a recent case, the ITAT Hyderabad held that the provisions of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act are not applicable when the source of income is disclosed.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition u/s 115BBE of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as present case doesn’t involve invocation of any of the sections i.e. section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C & 69D of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Amritsar held that in case of non-cooperation during conduct of special audit under section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, the time limit to do the same can be extended at the end of the department.
In Pavuluri Sylendra Nellore Vs ITO case, ITAT Hyderabad confirms addition under section 69C due to unexplained source of credit card payment.
ITAT Jodhpur upholds CIT(A)’s decision, negating the AO’s addition of Rs. 1.62 crore under Section 69C for Shri Prahalad Rai Rathi. The judgment clarifies all transactions were through banking, dismissing the alleged unexplained expenditure and unsecured loans as baseless.
ITAT Delhi held that addition of sundry creditors u/s 68/69C of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as department failed to prove that the sundry creditors are bogus.
ITAT Delhi held that addition based on some dummy name without incriminating material reflecting name of the assessee is unjustified.
ITAT Hyderabad held that once additional income offered during survey was simply accepted and assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act without invoking provisions of section 115BBE. Then, provisions of section 115BBE cannot be invoked via rectification as per section 154.
