What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the expenses might have been essential for the sale of land and remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for reconsideration of the assessee's submissions and documentary evidence.

The assessee claimed various expenditures totaling Rs. 39.83 Lacs while computing capital gains on the sale of land. The Assessing Officer denied these claims due to a lack of satisfactory evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the expenses claimed by the assessee for computing capital gains were substantiated and allowable.

M.Chinnadurai Nadar vs DCIT | ITAT Chennai 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Shri AR.V Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT

For Respondent: Shri AR.V Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय �ी महावीर िसंह, उपा�� एवं माननीय �ी मनोज कुमार अ�वाल ,लेखा सद� के सम�। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M. Chinnadurai Nadar DCIT-CC-III(2) बनाम/ 4, Madurai Street, Perambur Chennai - 600034 Vs. Chennai – 600 011 थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AHBPC-2989-G (अपीलाथ-/Appellant) : (01थ- / Respondent) अपीलाथ-कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None 01थ-कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri AR.V Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 11/10/2021 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 11/10/2021 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

M.CHINNADURAI NADAR,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments