Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Smt. Shashikala Ram Kumar Vs ACIT (Hyderabad)
Related Assessment Year : 2014-15
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Smt. Shashikala Ram Kumar Vs ACIT (Hyderabad)

Assesee disputed additions made u/s40(a)(ia) & 40A(3) before the CIT (A) and produced certificates under proviso to section 201(1) whereby CIT(A) deleted the 40(a)(ia) addition but confirmed the addition u/s40A(3). On further appeal before the the Tribunal Revenue contended that unless the assessee proves the circumstances under rule 6DD, he cannot claim any exception to sec 40A(3).

Assessee produced a certificate issued by

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

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

Tax Penalty Deleted Due to Consultant Fraud & Voluntary Payment: ITAT Backs Unaware Assessee ITAT Allows TDS Credit on Exempt Land Sale despite non-disclosure in ITR ITAT Chennai Upholds deletion of Additions For Undisclosed Profits, Excess Expenses & Stock Valuation ITAT Bangalore Upholds TDS Claim by Single Heir on Joint Property Sale Non-Enquiry by AO on Property Purchase Justifies Section 263 Revision: Hyderabad ITAT 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Your email address will not be published.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 *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Ads Free tax News and Updates
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
May 2025
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031