Explore the recent case ruling by ITAT Chennai where the verdict was overturned due to a pending delay condonation application, highlighting the importance of due process in tax disputes.
A landmark decision by ITAT Chennai reinforces the validity of capital gain deductions under Section 54, even when flat possession is delayed. Explore the key aspects and implications of the Anil Kirthisimhan Wijeyanayake Vs ACIT case.
Baskaran, the Karta of the HUF, submitted that his prolonged illness prevented him from managing the day-to-day activities of the business, causing the delay in filing the appeal. Despite this, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, stating that the delay wasn’t sufficiently justified.
Learn about the recent order of the ITAT Chennai in the V. Babu vs ACIT case, where the CIT(A) appeal rejection due to delayed filing by the assessee is set for re-adjudication.
ITAT Chennai held that addition towards amount received as income sustained as it was specified that the amount was not given as loan or advances but was given for service towards arranging the whole deal.
ITAT Chennai held that addition towards unexplained investment under section 69 of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as source for purchase of property duly established with necessary evidences.
ITAT Chennai held that the scope of assessment after search u/s.153A of the Income Tax Act would be limited to the incriminating material/evidence found during the course of search.
In present facts of the case, the ITAT observed that Guess work or estimation or extrapolation of income is not permissible unless there are strong evidences to suggest otherwise. The additions are to be based solely on tangible material and not on the basis of estimations or extrapolation theory
ITAT Chennai held that there is no obligation to deduct tax at source u/s 195 of the Income Tax Act as payment made to sister concern in USA is purely reimbursement of expense and does not involve any element of income.
ITAT Chennai held that in case of banking companies were shares & securities are held as stock in trade, dividend income is considered as business income, and consequently, provisions of Sec.14A of the Act, cannot be applied.
