Tag: ITAT Chennai

Consent of assessee cannot give AO right to make additions. the consent of the assesse/authorised representative cannot be a reason to sustain the addition.

Consent of assessee cannot give AO right to make additions. the consent of the assesse/authorised representative cannot be a reason to sustain the addition. This was upheld by ITAT Chennai in a recent judgment as under: Case Details: ITA Nos. 300 to 303/Mds/2016 Assessment Years : 2010-11 to 2013-14 M/s. …

No difference between gift and settlement for capital gain. Holding period of previous owner (settlor) transferring capital asset u/s 2(42A) to be counted

No difference between gift and settlement for capital gains purposes. In a recent judgment, ITAT, Chennai has held that  there is no difference between a gift and settlement and for the purpose of computing capital gains, the holding period of the capital asset (Trade Mark) transferred,  the holding period …

Funds shortage due to project expansion was sufficient cause not to impose penalty u/s 221(1) for self assessment tax non payment before filing ITR

In a recent judgment, ITAT Chennai has held that paucity of funds due to project expansion was a sufficient case not to levy penalty u/s 221(1) for non payment of self assessment tax before filing return of income.  Case Law Details: ITA No. 611/Mds/2014  Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/s. …

Section 68 not applicable to liabilities representing old opening balances. Assessee’s Consent / acceptance do not give jurisdiction/right to make addition

In a recent judgment, ITAT Chennai has stated that consent/acceptance given by assessee could not give jurisdiction and a right to the assessing authority to make an addition. The taxing authority can act only if there is power under the statute to do so. It further held that if the liabilities …