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...
Explore the implications of taxation under section 115BBE, including misuse of sections 68 to 69D, consequences of high tax rates, and relevant judicial precedents.
ITAT Indore held that excess stock was not kept separately and was part of business stock cannot be treated as deemed income u/s 69 or 69B of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, provisions of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act are not applicable on the surrendered income on account of excess stock found during the course of search.
ITAT Chennai held that in the present case AO himself referred the matter for special audit u/s 142(2A), however, report of special auditor was later rejected without assigning any reasons for the same is in explicable.
ITAT Jaipur held that addition towards short term capital loss treating it as bogus unsustainable as transaction of purchase and sale of shares done through banking channel and STT duly paid thereon.
Analysis of the recent ITAT ruling on Pawan Satyanarain Jalan Vs Assessing Officer Central where the penalty under Section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act was deleted.
ITAT allowed internet expenses and labour charges as business expenses and further held that Section 115BBE not applicable to expenses adequately explained during assessment
ITAT Mumbai held that Corporate Guarantee facility provided to overseas AE by the assessee is an international transaction and hence addition towards Arm’s Length Guarantee Fee confirmed.
ITAT Chennai held that rejection of special audit report of the special auditor appointed in terms of section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act on flimsy grounds without any finding as to how observation of the special auditor is incorrect.
Gujarat High court held that reasons recorded while issuing notice u/s 148 was that capital gain on sale of property was not reflected in return and hence income has escaped assessment. However, factually, capital gain was already reflected in the return and hence it cannot be said that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and hence reopening unsustained.
ITAT Mumbai held that reasonable amount of addition should be made in case of bogus purchase. Accordingly, CIT(A) has justifiably made addition on the reasonable estimate basis @ 5% of the bogus purchase.
