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 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 : ITAT Ahmedabad held that repayment of the entire loan with TDS-compliant interest payments undermined the allegation that the loan...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai held that loose sheets and estimates alone cannot justify an addition under Section 69B without independent corrobora...
Income Tax : CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies...
Bombay High Court upholds ITAT ruling in PCIT Vs SVD Resins, focusing on the legitimacy of purchase transactions and tax implications under Section 69C.
Bombay High Court held that half-hearted approach on the part of AO to make additions on the issue of bogus purchase would not be conducive. Bogus purchase addition also cannot be on the basis of superficial inquiry.
Karnataka High Court held that settlement commission, accepting additional income offered as reasonable and giving immunity from penalty and prosecution, by accepting the explanation ‘in the spirit of settlement’ cannot be faulted.
ITAT Kolkata held that CIT has not applied his mind analytically while assuming jurisdiction for taking cognizance under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. Thus, in absence of independent application of mind, invocation of revisionary provisions by CIT unsustainable.
Punjab & Haryana HC upholds Principal Commissioner’s revision under Section 263. Assessing Officer’s wrong Section 44ADA assessment found erroneous.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition u/s. 68 on account of unexplained cash credit, being bogus unsecured loan, and u/s. 69C on account of unexplained expenditure, being bogus interest claimed, unjustified as repayment of loans in subsequent year accepted.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that addition merely on the basis of retracted statement without any incriminating material seized from assessee’s premises is unsustainable in law and liable to be quashed.
ITAT Delhi held that addition towards excess stock merely on the basis of recorded statements and without any corroborative evidence of unaccounted sales is untenable in law. Accordingly, addition deleted.
ITAT Mumbai held that addition in respect of sale proceeds received for sale of shares on the stock exchange (BSE) as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act unjustified.
Explore the detailed ITAT Mumbai order analysis of Yogesh P. Thakkar vs DCIT, focusing on disputed long-term capital gains and commission expenditure.
