Income Tax : A practical guide explaining Sections 68 to 69D, burden of proof, judicial principles, litigation strategy and documentation requi...
Income Tax : Income without satisfactory explanation is taxed at a special high rate under Section 115BBE. The provisions place strict liabilit...
Income Tax : SEO Description: Explains which gifts qualify for exemption based on the statutory definition of “relative” and why not all fa...
Income Tax : An overview of Sections 68-69D of India's Income-tax Act, which empower tax authorities to assess unaccounted income from unexplai...
Income Tax : A Comprehensive Analysis of Undisclosed Incomes under Sections 68 to 69D of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Taxation of these Incomes Un...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi deleted Section 68 and bogus purchase additions, holding no incriminating material existed for concluded assessments an...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi quashed assessments for multiple years, citing defects in reassessment approvals, non-supply of material, invalid reope...
Income Tax : Tribunal held that omission to mention the exact charging provision did not vitiate the assessment where unexplained cash and bull...
Income Tax : The Tribunal emphasized that once sales are entered in regular books and supported by stock records, the burden shifts to the Reve...
Income Tax : ITAT held that additions relying merely on investigation wing reports and retracted statements, without direct incriminating evide...
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 Delhi deleted Section 68 and bogus purchase additions, holding no incriminating material existed for concluded assessments and rejecting estimated additions.
A practical guide explaining Sections 68 to 69D, burden of proof, judicial principles, litigation strategy and documentation requirements under the Income-tax Act.
ITAT Delhi quashed assessments for multiple years, citing defects in reassessment approvals, non-supply of material, invalid reopening and jurisdictional lapses.
Tribunal held that omission to mention the exact charging provision did not vitiate the assessment where unexplained cash and bullion were clearly established. Relief was granted only for the cash supported by contemporaneous records.
The Tribunal emphasized that once sales are entered in regular books and supported by stock records, the burden shifts to the Revenue to prove them false. In the absence of such proof, Section 68 could not be invoked.
CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies in assessments and incorrect tax computations leading to revenue loss.
Income without satisfactory explanation is taxed at a special high rate under Section 115BBE. The provisions place strict liability on taxpayers to justify the nature and source of funds.
ITAT held that additions relying merely on investigation wing reports and retracted statements, without direct incriminating evidence, violate settled principles governing Section 153A proceedings.
The Tribunal condoned a 298-day delay in filing appeal, holding that substantial justice must prevail over technicalities. It deleted additions on exempt gratuity and commuted pension, ruling they cannot be taxed as salary.
The Tribunal ruled that when purchases are disallowed as non-genuine without questioning the source of payment, section 69C cannot be invoked. A plausible disallowance under section 37(1) cannot be revised under section 263 merely to change the charging provision.
