Read all Latest Updates on and about section 133A of the Act

Begin typing your search above and press return to search.

Home
»
section 133A of the...

Taxpayer Cannot Dispute Taxability of Income Admitted in Return After 14 Months of Survey: Karnataka HC [Read Order]

In a recent ruling, the Karnataka High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee and held that a taxpayer cannot dispute the taxability of...

“Minuscule” Stock Gap No Defence: ITAT Sustains Section 69A Addition for Gold, Silver, Diamond Stock...

Loose Sheets without Third-Party Confirmation Insufficient for Addition u/s 69C: ITAT Directs Profit...

Survey Statement alone cannot Justify Bogus Purchase Additions: ITAT Deletes ₹3.60 Cr Addition u/s...

Declaration of Income as Less than that made in Survey under Presumptive Scheme u/s 44D: ITAT...

Purchases Treated as Bogus in Another Year Cannot Solely Justify Similar Treatment for Year Under Consideration: ITAT [Read Order]

The Kolkata Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) ruled that purchases treated as bogus in one financial year cannot automatically be presumed bogus in another year without sufficient...

Money Introduced from JDS Industries not Deemed Taxpayer’s Own Income: ITAT deletes Addition of 4.45 Core u/s 69 [Read Order]

The Ahmedabad bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) has deleted the addition of Rs. 4.45 crore under Section 69, of Income Tax Act, 1961 ruling that money introduced from JDS Industries is...

Incriminating Material found during Surveys when relied by CIT(A), copies should be provided to assessee in adherence to Principles of Natural Justice: ITAT [Read Order]

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) of Varanasi Bench has held that when the department relies on the incriminating material found during surveyscopies of the same should be provided to assessee...

No Penalty If Income Already Offered to Tax by Different Entity: ITAT [Read Order]

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmadabad Bench, has recently, in an appeal filed before it, held that no penalty can be imposed if income already offered to tax by a different entity. ...