Kyna FinTax

@Kynafintax

Tax | Regulatory | Corporate Advisory Team of CAs, CSs, CMAs & Technology Professionals. Insights on Taxation, Compliance & Business Regulations

Delhi, India

Joined February 2025

32 Following

7 Followers

159 Posts

Kyna FinTax @Kynafintax

8 days ago · Delhi

Foreign Assets may soon be reflected in your AIS/TIS. Tax transparency is only getting stronger. If you have foreign assets or income, ensure proper disclosure in your ITR. Ignoring it today could mean notices and penalties tomorrow. #IncomeTax #ForeignAssets

Kyna FinTax @Kynafintax

8 days ago · Delhi

ICAI has proposed a comprehensive legal framework for Virtual Digital Assets (VDAs), covering accounting, auditing, taxation, disclosures, and investor protection. This isn't about promoting crypto—it's about regulatory clarity, stronger governance, & better compliance. #Crypto

Kyna FinTax @Kynafintax

about 1 month ago

CA Final Results are out! 🎉 Congratulations to the 7,931 candidates who have successfully cleared the CA Final examination and become Chartered Accountants today. A remarkable achievement earned through dedication and persistence. Wishing you all a bright future ahead! ✨ #CAFinalResults #ICAI #NewCAs #caresults #castudents

Kynafintax's tweet photo. CA Final Results are out! 🎉

Congratulations to the 7,931 candidates who have successfully cleared the CA Final examination and become Chartered Accountants today. A remarkable achievement earned through dedication and persistence.

Wishing you all a bright future ahead! ✨

#CAFinalResults #ICAI #NewCAs #caresults #castudents

232

Kyna FinTax @Kynafintax

about 1 month ago · New Delhi

₹1.28 Crore Cash Deposit, ₹44 Lakh Tax Demand & A Big Lesson from ITAT Pune A recent Income Tax case involving scrap dealer Wajeed Khan highlights an important principle in tax assessments: similar facts should generally be treated consistently across different years. The Facts Wajeed Khan had been engaged in the scrap business for around 12 years. For AY 2016-17, he filed his Income Tax Return declaring an income of only ₹3,00,340. However, the Income Tax Department's data analytics system identified cash deposits of ₹1,28,26,078 in his cooperative bank account. This triggered reopening of the assessment under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act. Initially, the taxpayer did not respond to the notices issued by the department. Taxpayer's Explanation After multiple notices, Wajeed Khan submitted that: • He was carrying on a genuine scrap business. • His computer hard disk had crashed due to a virus, making it difficult to retrieve transaction records. • The cash deposited in the bank represented business turnover from the scrap trade. • The income should be estimated by applying a reasonable net profit rate, rather than treating the entire deposit as unexplained money. What the Assessing Officer Did The Assessing Officer was not convinced by the explanation. The officer: • Treated the entire cash deposit of ₹1,28,26,078 as unexplained money under Section 69A. • Applied the provisions of Section 115BBE. • Determined total income at approximately ₹1.31 crore, instead of the ₹3 lakh declared by the taxpayer. As a result, the taxpayer faced a tax demand of roughly ₹44 lakh. First Appeal Failed The taxpayer challenged the assessment before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). However, the appeal was dismissed and the addition made by the Assessing Officer was confirmed. At this stage, the substantial tax demand remained in force. The Turning Point at ITAT Before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), the taxpayer raised an important argument. He produced records showing that: • In earlier assessment years, the department had accepted his scrap business. • In subsequent years as well, similar business activities had been accepted. • Income from the business had been assessed on an estimated profit basis. The taxpayer questioned why the same business activity was being treated differently only for AY 2016-17. The Consistency Principle The Tribunal found merit in the taxpayer's contention. A well-established principle in tax jurisprudence is that when facts and circumstances remain substantially the same, the tax department should maintain consistency in its approach unless there is a valid reason to depart from earlier treatment. If a business has been accepted in preceding and succeeding years, a different view for one isolated year requires proper justification. ITAT's Decision Importantly, the Tribunal did not outright delete the addition. Instead, ITAT: • Set aside the appellate order. • Restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination. • Directed the Assessing Officer to consider records of earlier and subsequent years. • Directed that adequate opportunity of hearing be provided to the taxpayer. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. Key Takeaway This case does not mean that every cash deposit can automatically be treated as business turnover. Taxpayers must still be able to demonstrate: • Existence of a genuine business. • Supporting records and surrounding circumstances. • Consistency in business activities over the years. However, the ruling reinforces an important principle: Where a business has been accepted by the tax department in earlier and later years, the same facts should not ordinarily be treated differently in one intervening year without strong reasons. #IncomeTax #ITAT #TaxLitigation #TaxPlanning #TaxCompliance

Kyna FinTax @Kynafintax