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 held that section 69 cannot be invoked where purchases are duly recorded in books and paid through banking channels, making t...
Income Tax : Detailed overview of penalties under various sections of the Income Tax Act, covering defaults in tax payment, reporting, document...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT deleted a 69C unexplained expenditure addition for alleged bogus purchases, ruling that when corresponding sales are ac...
Income Tax : Reassessment quashed by ITAT Bangalore as failure to pass a speaking order on objections violated mandatory procedure under Sectio...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that disallowance of interest cannot be finalized when the validity of underlying loans is still under appeal. I...
Income Tax : The issue was whether purchases could be treated as bogus based on investigation reports. ITAT held that when documentary evidence...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that purchases cannot be treated as bogus when supported by invoices, bank payments, and GST records. It ruled t...
Income Tax : The issue was whether income from hybrid seed production on leased land qualifies as agricultural income. The Tribunal held that o...
The issue was validity of reopening beyond the limitation period. The Tribunal held the notice issued after the prescribed time was invalid, and quashed the entire reassessment.
The issue was addition of cash deposits during demonetisation as unexplained income. The Tribunal held that the assessee’s explanation supported by affidavit was credible, leading to deletion of the addition.
The tribunal dismissed the appeal as the assessee failed to appear and substantiate claims despite multiple opportunities. It emphasized that procedural non-compliance weakens legal claims.
The Tribunal held that LTCG cannot be treated as bogus merely based on investigation reports. It ruled that documented transactions through banking and stock exchange channels prove genuineness.
ITAT examined addition under Section 69C for unexplained credit card payments made by the assessee. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO for proper verification, emphasizing the need for independent inquiry before confirming additions.
The issue was whether reassessment under Section 147 is valid after a search. The ITAT held it invalid, ruling that only Section 153A applies post-search, making the reassessment void.
The tribunal held that addition under Section 69C is not valid where expenditure is properly recorded and the source is explained. The key takeaway is that documented transactions through banking channels cannot be treated as unexplained.
Courts have clarified that purchases cannot be disallowed without proper evidence. Genuine transactions supported by documents cannot be treated as unexplained expenditure.
The Tribunal held that the addition based on third-party software data was invalid as the material was not provided to the assessee. Denial of cross-examination was found to violate principles of natural justice.
The Tribunal held that additions cannot be sustained merely on third-party Excel sheets and statements. It ruled that absence of independent evidence and denial of cross-examination renders such additions invalid.
