Income Tax : This guide explains how unexplained cash credits under Section 68 and related provisions can attract steep taxation under Section ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that cash deposits during demonetisation cannot be treated as unexplained when backed by audited books, invoices...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that profit cannot be estimated arbitrarily when regular books of account are maintained and not rejected unde...
Income Tax : A large spousal gift exemption was denied due to failure in proving genuineness, creditworthiness, and source of funds. The ruling...
Income Tax : Income without satisfactory explanation is taxed at a special high rate under Section 115BBE. The provisions place strict liabilit...
Income Tax : The Tribunal upheld the denial of deduction under Section 80GGC after finding that the political donation formed part of an allege...
Income Tax : The Mumbai ITAT held that an addition under Section 68 cannot be made solely on the basis of a retracted statement alleging accomm...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata upheld the deletion of disallowance relating to brought forward losses of an amalgamating company after finding that ...
Income Tax : The ITAT Ahmedabad held that isolated WhatsApp messages and electronic communications cannot, by themselves, support additions in ...
Income Tax : The ITAT Bangalore held that additions under Section 68 could not be sustained without proper examination of bank statements, PAN ...
Income Tax : CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies...
Income Tax : Assessing Officers should follow the sequence as noted below for applying provisions of section 68 of the Act: Step 1: Whether the...
The Tribunal upheld the denial of deduction under Section 80GGC after finding that the political donation formed part of an alleged accommodation entry arrangement. The ruling emphasised that deductions may be denied where investigative findings indicate a lack of genuineness and remain unrebutted by the taxpayer.
The Mumbai ITAT held that an addition under Section 68 cannot be made solely on the basis of a retracted statement alleging accommodation loans when documentary evidence proves identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness.
ITAT Kolkata upheld the deletion of disallowance relating to brought forward losses of an amalgamating company after finding that the amalgamated entity had continued the business and retained the prescribed fixed assets. The Tribunal held that there was no evidence showing non-compliance with Section 72A(2).
The ITAT Ahmedabad held that isolated WhatsApp messages and electronic communications cannot, by themselves, support additions in search assessments. The Tribunal deleted several additions because no corroborative evidence established actual cash transactions. The ruling underscores that suspicion cannot replace proof in tax proceedings.
The ITAT Bangalore held that additions under Section 68 could not be sustained without proper examination of bank statements, PAN details, confirmations, and other supporting evidence. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration.
The Delhi ITAT concluded that the assessee had discharged the burden of proving the three essential ingredients required under Section 68. The Revenue failed to demonstrate that the funds originated from the assessee itself. The decision resulted in the deletion of the entire addition relating to share capital and premium.
The Calcutta High Court upheld the Tribunal’s order after finding that the reopening of assessment proceeded on incorrect facts regarding alleged exempt income from penny stock transactions. The Court held that no substantial question of law arose for consideration.
ITAT Delhi confirmed disallowance of a Section 80GGC claim after relying on investigation findings that the political party operated as an accommodation entry provider. The ruling emphasizes substance over form in tax deduction claims.
The Tribunal held that cash deposits linked to recorded cash sales could not be taxed again under Section 68, as doing so would amount to impermissible double taxation.
The Tribunal held that cash received from members and credited to their accounts could not be treated as unexplained income of the co-operative society under Section 68.
