Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Section 69C

Latest Articles


Undisclosed Sources of Income and Tax Rate Applicable [Section 68-69D of Income Tax Act,1961]

Income Tax : Discover the tax implications and rates for undisclosed sources of income under Sections 68-69D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Learn...

July 3, 2024 1326 Views 0 comment Print

Tax Liability on Unexplained Investment/Expenditure: Implications for Taxpayers

Income Tax : Explore the heavy tax implications on taxpayers for unexplained investments and expenditures under Income Tax Act sections 69 to 6...

January 3, 2024 2028 Views 0 comment Print

Know in detail Section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C & 69D of Income Tax Act, 1961

Income Tax : Explore sections 68 to 69D of Income Tax Act 1961, covering unexplained cash credits, investments, and more. Learn about legal pro...

October 27, 2023 2694 Views 0 comment Print

Difference between section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and their Taxability

Income Tax : Explore the differences between income tax Sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C in India, their taxability, and implications. Understand...

August 17, 2023 5208 Views 0 comment Print

Section 115BBE needs Relook: Know Misuse, Consequences & Judicial Precedents

Income Tax : Explore the implications of taxation under section 115BBE, including misuse of sections 68 to 69D, consequences of high tax rates,...

August 12, 2023 17685 Views 0 comment Print


Latest Judiciary


ITAT deletes addition for alleged bogus long-term capital gains

Income Tax : Explore the detailed ITAT Mumbai order analysis of Yogesh P. Thakkar vs DCIT, focusing on disputed long-term capital gains and com...

July 12, 2024 672 Views 0 comment Print

Alleged bogus LTCG: ITAT deletes additions in absence of corroborative direct evidence

Income Tax : Read the full text of the ITAT Mumbai order in DCIT vs. Dilip B. Jiwrajka covering appeals against additions of unexplained income...

July 12, 2024 564 Views 0 comment Print

Capital Gain cannot be treated as Bogus without any concrete evidence

Income Tax : Explore the case of Shaily Prince Goyal vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) regarding cash credits from penny stock sales. Detailed analysis of S...

July 9, 2024 606 Views 0 comment Print

Delhi HC Denies Tax Exemption to Trust Charging Capitation Fee

Income Tax : Explore the Delhi High Court's judgment on ITSC's conclusive nature for AY, assessing reassessment under Section 148 of the Income...

July 9, 2024 162 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT allows taxation of excess stock & unexplained marriage expenses as business Income

Income Tax : Discover the ITAT Chennai verdict on Santhilal Jain Vijay Kumar Vs ITO, addressing taxation on excess stock and unexplained marria...

June 29, 2024 573 Views 0 comment Print


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

December 14, 2020 2589 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Mumbai: Anil K. Shah’s appeal against reassessment. Challenges various additions including expenses, borrowed funds, and alleged bogus purchases. Legal and evidential arguments presented.

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

November 13, 2020 4851 Views 0 comment Print

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 […]

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

November 4, 2020 1776 Views 0 comment Print

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?

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

October 28, 2020 2358 Views 0 comment Print

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 […]

Entire Purchase cannot be disallowed by Considering it as Bogus

October 25, 2020 3720 Views 0 comment Print

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

ITAT upheld disallowance to 12.5% of non-genuine purchases

October 23, 2020 864 Views 0 comment Print

ITO v. Raj Tools Centre PAP (ITAT Mumbai) Appeals is against addition of ₹.2,60,603/-, as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act. As per the investigations carried out by the Sales Tax Authorities, the aforementioned parties were found to be involved in giving accommodation entries only without actually supplying the goods. The logical inference is […]

Cash found short cannot be treated as income of assessee

October 16, 2020 3984 Views 0 comment Print

A.P. Refinery Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh) The issue before us relates to addition made to the income of the assessee on account of cash found short with the assessee. Cash short, at the most represents expenses / outgoings out of cash available with the assessee not accounted for in the books of the […]

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

September 14, 2020 10872 Views 0 comment Print

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?

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

September 5, 2020 2016 Views 0 comment Print

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?

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

July 28, 2020 723 Views 0 comment Print

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?

Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031