Tag: addition 69C
Addition u/s 69C towards alleged bogus purchase deleted due to failure of AO to bring on record any material/evidence for alleging such transactions. In a recent judgment, Kolkata ITAT has deleted addition made u/s 69C towards alleged bogus purchase due to failure of the AO to bring on …
ITAT confirmed addition u/s 69C as unexplained expenditure over and above Gross Profit addition In a recent judgment, ITAT Hyderabad confirmed addition under section 69C as unexplained expenditure over and above the GP addition holding that the two additions serve different purposes i.e. one addresses the unexplained nature …
Addition for unexplained expenditure incurred on election on candidates of Aam Aadmi Party confirmed by ITAT In a recent judgment, ITAT Delhi has upheld the addition for unexplained expenditure incurred on election on candidates of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 4128 (2024) (07) ITAT In …
Applicability of provisions of Section 115BBE read with Section 69, 69A and 69C in a case arising before Settlement Commission – Allahabad HC directs AO decide the issue In a recent judgment, the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court has directed AO to examine non applicability of Section 115BBE read …
ITAT partly confirms addition of site expenses as unexplained expenditure for being not accounted for in the books of accounts in the expense ledger In a recent judgment, the ITAT has confirmed the addition of unexplained expenditure u/s 69C towards site expenses not accounted for in the books …
Addition for unexplained agricultural expenditure u/s 69C deleted. Agricultural expenses depend on so many factors which were ignored by Assessing Officer (AO) – ITAT In a recent judgment, ITAT has deleted the addition made u/s 69C towards unexplained agricultural expenditure holding that expenses on agriculture depend on many …
Mere affidavits of typographical error by typist & CA in Audit Report not enough when assessee was found to maintain duplicate accounts – Supreme Court ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3735 (2023) (05) SC Important Case Laws relied upon:CST vs. Esufali (HM) Abdulali (HM) (1973) 90 ITR 271 (SC)Nalinakshi …
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) deleted as quantum addition was reduced significantly from 100% to 20% in respect of bogus purchases. In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) confirming penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) imposed by the …
Addition u/s 69C for unexplained expenses on foreign tour along with spouse deleted by Tribunal as it was part of the sponsored dealership entourage ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2725 (2019) (01) ITAT The assessment was completed under section 153A read with section 143 (3) of the Income …
Only real income can be taxed under Income Tax Act. Even if whole transaction is not verifiable only income component not the entire purchase taxable ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 1275 (2017) (05) ITAT The Grievance: The appellant assessee was aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner …
