Income Tax : This guide explains when penalties can be imposed under various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It also outlines the appli...
Income Tax : This guide explains how unexplained cash credits under Section 68 and related provisions can attract steep taxation under Section ...
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 : The ITAT Kolkata held that the reassessment was invalid because the ACIT lacked pecuniary jurisdiction and completed the assessmen...
Income Tax : The ITAT Ahmedabad held that the assessee had discharged its burden under Section 68 by producing confirmations, PAN, bank stateme...
Income Tax : The ITAT Mumbai held that Section 69C cannot be invoked where expenditure is duly recorded in the books and its source is fully ex...
Income Tax : ITAT Guwahati held that additions could not be sustained where the transactions related to a separate partnership firm with a diff...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that an untested third-party statement, without supporting evidence or cross-examination, cannot form the sole basis...
Income Tax : CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies...
ITAT Raipur held that providing unreasonably short period of time of six days for furnishing reply vide notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act is against the mandate of law and hence liable to be set aside.
ITAT Jaipur partially allows Amit Product’s appeal in a bogus purchase case, reducing disallowance to 10% of Rs. 32.88 lakh.
ITAT Raipur that where the income of the assessee has been computed by applying a gross profit rate, there is no need to look into the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act as gross profit rate takes care of expenses otherwise than by way of crossed cheque.
ITAT Jodhpur partly allows appeal in Kishana Ram vs ITO, upholding additions related to capital discrepancies and agricultural income under Section 143(3).
The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny assessment and notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued. Consequently, notice u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were also issued.
ITAT Nagpur held that addition towards unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the Income Tax Act not warranted since the same are already covered in declaration of income hence no separate additions warranted.
ITAT Delhi held that addition merely on the basis of entries found in the seized diary without any corroborative evidence and without any independent enquiry by AO is not sustainable. Accordingly, addition made by AO is deleted.
ITAT Chennai rules unaccounted customer deposits, with traceable identities and commercial substance, are liabilities, not income under Section 68.
ITAT Ahmedabad restores assessment, citing denial of fair opportunity and inadequate evidence review by AO in Sections 69A/69C case. (159 Characters)
Bombay High Court confirms full disallowance of expenses on unproven purchases, citing failure to prove genuineness and reliance on precedent.
