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...
The Tribunal noted that the assessee provided affidavits, bank statements, and financials of contributors. The addition was deleted as the source stood satisfactorily explained.
The Tribunal ruled that supplying only a summary of reasons is insufficient in law. The failure to furnish recorded reasons vitiated the entire reassessment.
The Tribunal upheld deletion of additions as the AO failed to provide evidence or conduct independent verification. The ruling highlights the need for substantiated findings in reassessment cases.
The Tribunal held that mere suspicion of bogus transactions without supporting evidence cannot justify addition under section 68. Proper documentation of sales and purchases led to deletion of the addition.
Reassessment quashed by ITAT Bangalore as failure to pass a speaking order on objections violated mandatory procedure under Sections 147/148, rendering entire proceedings invalid in law.
The Tribunal held that disallowance of interest cannot be finalized when the validity of underlying loans is still under appeal. It remanded the matter for reconsideration after the earlier year’s decision.
The issue was whether purchases could be treated as bogus based on investigation reports. ITAT held that when documentary evidence and asset existence are proven, additions cannot be sustained.
The Tribunal held that purchases cannot be treated as bogus when supported by invoices, bank payments, and GST records. It ruled that absence of adverse evidence makes such additions unsustainable.
The issue was whether income from hybrid seed production on leased land qualifies as agricultural income. The Tribunal held that ownership is not necessary if the assessee exercises control, bears risk, and performs agricultural operations.
The issue was whether reassessment is valid without proper service of notice. The Tribunal held that absence of valid service makes the entire reassessment void and unsustainable.
