ITAT Chennai held that written off of irrecoverable advances given to company partakes the nature of business loss which can be allowed as deduction. Accordingly, delete additions made towards disallowance of written off of advances.
ITAT Chennai held that disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA of the Income Tax Act unsustainable as cost of power imported is charged before computing income eligible for deduction u/s 80IA.
ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69 of the Income Tax Act sustained as no corroborative evidence produced to prove the source for the cash deposits during demonetization period.
Penalty was levied under section 271 B of the Act on the ground that tax audit report under section 44AB of the Act was not filed by the assessee before filing of return of income and no explanation was given.
ITAT Chennai held that addition u/s 69 towards unexplained money sustained on failure to explain the source of the cash deposits with necessary evidences.
mere non-disclosure of agricultural income in the return of income does not change the characteristics of land. Subsequent use of land by the purchaser has no connection to decide the nature of land, whether it is an agricultural land.
ITAT Chennai held that deduction towards purchase of air conditioner, furnishing of curtains, light fittings is allowable as cost of improvement while computing capital gains.
SDS Cargo Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) PCIT had given a categorical finding that the AO has not carried out any enquiries on the issue of CFS charges paid to Continental Warehousing Corporation in light of relevant provisions of the Act which render the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the […]
ITAT Chennai held that for invoking provisions of section 40A(2)(b), AO has to bring on record some comparable cases of similar nature to allege that hire charges paid by the assessee is unreasonable and excessive, when compared to market rates. In absence of the same, addition is unsustainable.
Nagarathinam Rajendran Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) Since the assessee could not file his return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 274 r.w.s. 271 F of the Act. There was no response from the assessee against the penalty notice. Since, the assessee failed to file his return […]
