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 : 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...
Income Tax : The issue was whether reassessment is valid without proper service of notice. The Tribunal held that absence of valid service make...
An overview of Sections 68-69D of India’s Income-tax Act, which empower tax authorities to assess unaccounted income from unexplained credits, investments, and expenses.
Relying on Malabar Industrial, Max India, and Gabriel India precedents, ITAT ruled that when two views are possible, PCIT cannot assume jurisdiction. Original assessment for AY 2020-21 was restored.
ITAT Amritsar held that the statements recorded behind the back of the assessee cannot be used for making addition unless and an opportunity to cross examine the witness is allowed. Accordingly, addition towards bogus purchases duly restricted to 1.2%.
The ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of Nilesh Shirish Mehta, setting aside a reassessment order for AY 2015-16. The tribunal found the Section 148 notice, issued after April 1, 2021, to be time-barred and invalid based on concessions made by the Department before the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal.
The ITAT Raipur quashed the reopening of an assessment under Section 147, ruling that search-based cases on third-party material must be initiated under Section 153C.
In a recent order, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai has provided a significant verdict in the case of Rajesh Shivji Shah vs. Income Tax Officer (ITO) for the assessment year 2011-12.
ITAT emphasized that section 69C applies only to unexplained or unrecorded expenditure; recorded educational expenses cannot be arbitrarily disallowed.
The ITAT Kolkata dismisses the Revenue’s appeal, ruling that a ₹1.59 crore addition for alleged bogus sales was unfounded, as the company provided substantial evidence including e-way bills and bank statements.
ITAT Delhi held that applicability of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act without initially fixing the addition under any of the charging provisions i.e. section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C and 69D of the Income Tax Act is not tenable in the eye of law. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
The ITAT Mumbai has ruled in favor of Ankit Gems, deleting a tax addition for alleged bogus purchases. The court found no evidence and placed the burden of proof on the tax department.
