Devarajulu Natarajan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) Ld. CIT(A), noted that post demonetization, cash deposited in State Bank of Hyderabad was only Rs.2.50 Lacs and cash deposited in Canara bank was Rs.6 Lacs only. Accordingly, the addition was restricted to Rs.8.50 Lacs. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR pleaded for […]
ITAT Chennai held that as the value of goods are duly accepted by the Central Excise department without there being any modification then AO doesn’t have any jurisdiction to go beyond the same.
Raymold Lighting Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) ITAT noted that this appeal is against the rectification order passed by A.O and the impugned order by CIT(A) on this order of rectification u/s. 154 of the Act dated 27.09.2017. We noted that in the original appeal filed before CIT(A) by the assessee, the assessee has […]
Once the maintenance charges were attributable to the letting out services provided, same derived from providing services was to be considered under the head income from other sources and not income from house property
Saravana Foundation Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) Against levy of penalty under section 271B of the Act, the assessee has submitted the reasons for the delay in filing the audit report before the ld. CIT(A) that the accounts audited under section 44AB of the Act belatedly as the assessee was not keeping good health and the […]
Delay cannot be condoned as Assessee could not file any evidences as to how Assessee’s Counsel was preoccupied in his professional commitments for 649 days.
The Ld. AR has also submitted that the case for this year was picked up for scrutiny wherein the rental income has been assessed by AO as ‘business income’.
ITAT Chennai held that undisclosed income allegation unsustainable as during search no incriminating material was found in respect of on-money receipt and AO also failed to establish the receipt of the same.
Loans obtained by assessee were utilized for its business purposes and therefore, interest so paid would constitute business expenditure and accordingly, an allowable deduction.
ITAT Chennai held that provisions of section 56(2)(vii) of the Income Tax Act doesnt apply when the property received under a will or by way of inheritance
