Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Ravi Vijayalakshmi Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Related Assessment Year : 2016-17
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Ravi Vijayalakshmi Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) The assessee purchased an immovable property jointly with her spouse for ₹2 crore, whereas the stamp duty value attributable to her share was ₹3.82 crore. The AO invoked section 56(2)(vii)(b) and added the difference as income from other sources, resulting in assessed income of about ₹3.73 crore. Based on this addition, the AO levied penalty of ₹1.10 crore u/s 271(1)(c) alleging tax evasion. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal primarily on the ground of delay of 34 days in filing the appeal, treating it as non-maintainable without exami...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Reopening Fails on Both Counts: Invalid Sec 148A Notice and Time-Barred Sec 148 Render Assessment Void Coffee Income: Rule 7B Overrides Rule 7 – ITAT Remands for Segregation of Own vs Purchased Produce Duty Drawback Taxable Only on Receipt – ITAT Deletes Addition & U/s 270A Penalty Skill Development = “Education” – ITAT Allows Sec 11 Exemption to Charitable Trust No Penalty for Wrong Claim or Head of Income – ITAT Deletes Section 271(1)(c) Penalty View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ads Free tax News and Updates
Search Post by Date
April 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930