ITAT Chennai held that as per the provisions of Sec.199(3) of the Act r.w.r.37BA(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, credit for TDS shall be given for assessment year for which such income is assessable.
ITAT Chennai held that reopening of assessment in absence of any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts necessary for the assessment and without any new tangible material is untenable in law.
ITAT Chennai held that rejection of books of accounts justified as transactions recorded in the books of accounts are not properly vouched or supported by proper documents. Further, expenses and related vouchers were also not found in accordance with books of accounts.
ITAT Chennai has ruled that a dissolved company is exempt from Income Tax Assessment proceedings. The judgement underscores the definitive end of a company’s existence post-dissolution, exempting it from any further legal proceedings.
ITAT Chennai Held that the provisions of section 43A of the Act specifically provides that the amount of increase or decrease in the liability due to fluctuation in exchange rate should be adjusted against the actual cost of the capital expenditure or the cost of acquisition of capital asset.
ITAT Chennai held that additions made towards disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the I.T. Rules, 1962 to book profit computed u/s. 115JB(2) of the Income Tax Act is unsustainable.
ITAT Chennai held that depreciation towards payment as non-compete fee for purpose of business of assessee is duly allowable.
ITAT Chennai held that strict conditions provided in Rule 37BA should be read in the provisions of Section 199(1) to make it workable in genuine cases where department is sure no double credit is allowed or claimed.
Chennai ITAT dismisses Revenue’s appeal against Kovai Medical Centre and Hospital Limited. Consultant doctors’ payments subjected to Section 194J, not 192, due to lack of employer-employee relationship.
ITAT Chennai held that trade payable appearing in the books of accounts duly explained. Accordingly, addition towards the same u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act is unjustified and liable to be deleted.
