Cash deposited during demonetization can’t be unexplained if taxpayer has a history of cash sales and no discrepancies found in books.
Read Supreme Court judgment in Sree Durga Distributors vs. State of Karnataka on taxation of dog and cat feed under Entry 5 of Karnataka VAT Act.
ITAT Chennai directs AO to accept 50% of cash deposits as sale proceeds and balance as unexplained money in J. Kalappa Naidu Sons’ case vs. ITO.
Discover ITAT Surat’s decision in Keshri Export vs. ITO case for Assessment Year 2017-18. Learn why rejection of entire books of account was considered unnecessary
Kerala High Court quashes Income Tax Act Section 148A notice and order, citing absence of a reasonable opportunity for petitioner to be heard
In a significant ruling, ITAT Delhi states that no disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D can be made if no exempt income was earned in previous year.
Explore Bodal Chemicals Ltd vs. C.C.E. & S.T. case where CESTAT Ahmedabad remands matter pending a Supreme Court decision on Cenvat credit for exempted goods.
ITAT Chennai held that addition towards unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act unjustified as assessee has filed necessary evidence to explain nature and source for cash deposits.
ITAT Delhi held that for the purpose of Section 153A/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, the assessment can be said to be ‘made’ only when the DIN is quoted on the order before it is signed. Order passed u/s 153A without first generating the DIN is invalid and bad-in-law.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the provision of section 50C of Act cannot be made applicable to transaction of capital assets transferred by assessee to a partnership firm by way capital contribution. Such transaction falls under the provision of section 45(3) of the Income Tax Act.
