This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
In the case of remittances by banking channel the onus on the assessee U/s. 69 stands discharged, and therefore, section 5(2)(b) does not apply
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Sushila Ramasamy Vs. ACIT (ITAT Chennai)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All ITAT, ITAT Chennai
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of CIT(A) dated 21.02.2007 for AY 1995-96.
2. It is seen that there was a delay of eighteen days in filing of this appeal by the- assessee, and an application for condonation of the delay was filed supported by an affidavit. After hearing both the parties the request for condonation of delay was allowed.
3. The grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are as under.
1. The CIT(Appeals) erred, both in law and on the facts of the case, in sustaining the addition of Rs.4,68,85,840 to the income returned.
2. Having been admitted R...
