ITAT Chennai held that invocation of revisionary proceedings under section 263 of the Income Tax Act not justified as AO has applied his mind and revision u/s. 263 cannot be possible for mere change of opinion. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
ITAT Chennai held that adhoc disallowance of expenses merely on the basis of suspicion without adequate evidence and cogent reason is not tenable in law. Accordingly, adhoc disallowance under repair and maintenance and sundry expense set aside.
ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act towards cash deposit during demonetization not justified since assessee has sufficiently explained that the said deposit is from earlier withdrawal. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
ITAT Chennai invalidated reassessment in Pawan Cargo Forwards’ case due to notice issued by JAO, not FAO, violating the CBDT’s 2022 faceless scheme. Penny stock addition deleted.
ITAT Chennai held that invocation of revisionary power under section 263 of the Income Tax Act by PCIT justified since AO erroneously accepted the returned income without complete enquiry. Accordingly, appeal of assessee dismissed and revisionary proceedings upheld.
In M. Balasubramaniam v Federal Bank, DRAT Chennai ordered guarantors to pay pro-rata dues of ₹9.03 lakhs each but imposed 6% simple interest from 2002 due to their negligence in the appeal.
ITAT Chennai asks CIT(E) to reconsider Bright Educational Trust’s delayed 80G application under amended Section 80G(5)(iv)(B) of the Income Tax Act, effective 01.10.2024.
The ITAT Chennai has restored a charitable trust’s appeal for 80G approval back to the CIT(E), pending a CBDT decision on its condonation request for a 90-day delay in filing.
The issue was regarding the disallowance of depreciation and expenses on retention money. Assessee had purchase contracts with retention money payable after successful performance of machinery and recorded the liability under the mercantile system.
The ITAT Chennai ruled on whether land was an urban capital asset and on the correct sale consideration. It held the land was a capital asset but restricted taxable sale consideration to the amount for land actually transferred in the assessment year.
