BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

323 results for “TDS”+ Short Term Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai974Delhi748Bangalore352Chennai323Kolkata173Ahmedabad126Chandigarh114Jaipur91Raipur69Hyderabad66Indore46Surat38Pune22Lucknow22Visakhapatnam21Karnataka21Cuttack12Telangana10Nagpur10Agra9Rajkot9Guwahati8Dehradun8Kerala6Amritsar6SC6Panaji5Jabalpur4Jodhpur3Cochin3Calcutta2Patna1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Disallowance56Addition to Income55Section 143(3)52Section 4050Deduction44Section 8036Section 80H36Section 153C31Section 531TDS

ACIT, LTU-2,, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2618/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

short 'the Rules') w.e.f. 01.07.2016 (relevant to AY 2017-18). Therefore, the AO/Ld.CIT(A) erred in disallowing the weighted deduction u/s.32(2AB) of the Act on the expenditure incurred in an approved in- house in R& D facility. In other words, deduction can't be restricted to the amount of expenditure quantified by the DSIR before

PADMA VASHI SHEWARAMANI,CHENNAI vs. ADIT, CHENNAI

Showing 1–20 of 323 · Page 1 of 17

...
30
Section 19528
Section 234E22

In the result, the impugned is set aside and the appeal of the

ITA 2281/CHNY/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2015AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Vikas Awasthyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2281/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-08 Smt. Padma Vashi Shewaramani, The Assistant Director Of No.73, Janki Bhawan, V. Income Tax, Sardar Patel Road, International Taxation, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aayps 4687 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Mohandass, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. Das Gupta, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 50

short term capital gain. The A.O. has failed to consider the revised computation. In support of his submission, the Ld. A.R. placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT (284 ITR 323). On the third issue 5 I.T.A. No.2281/Mds/14 of treating rental income from letting

NARENDRA MAHENDRA KOTHARI,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 5(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1006/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1006/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 V. Shri Narendra Mahendra- The Income Tax Officer, Kothari, Non-Corporate Ward-5(2), No.76, Osian Heights, Chennai. Basin Bridge Road, Mint, Chennai-600 079. [Pan: Amopk 2535 Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Shri D. Anand, Advocate : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Arv Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit : सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing 05.02.2024 घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of : 14.02.2024 Pronouncement

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 54Section 68Section 80C

Short Term Capital Gain’, the question of allowing deduction u/s.54F of the Act, does not arise, and thus, in our considered view, there is no error in the reasons given by the AO and the Ld.CIT(A) to reject deduction claimed u/s.54/54F of the Act. Thus, we are inclined to uphold the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) and reject

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI vs. ROHITKUMAR NEMCHAND PIPARIA, CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1344/CHNY/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1344/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Ito Shri Rohitkumar Nemchand Piparia बनाम International Taxation Ward-2(1) #34 (Old #77), Meddox Street, / Vs. Chennai. Choolai, Chennai-600 112. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akzpp-0661-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri T. Banusekar & Ms. Samyuktha Banusekar (Advocates) - Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07-10-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar & Ms. SamyukthaFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 234C

Short Term Capital Gains in the hands of the assessee. It could also be seen that initially the assessee has not computed gains on this transaction and never offered the same in the return of income. The same is ostensibly on the assumption that whatever tax was deducted at source by the bank was final tax liability for the assessee

TAMIL NADU BRICK INDUSTRIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 744/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.744/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Tamilnadu Brick Industries, The Income Tax Officer, No. 47, Mangali Nagar 1St Street, Vs. Non Corporate Circle 8(1), Arumbakkam, Chennai 600 106. Chennai. [Pan: Aafft3643P] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar Punna, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.02.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.05.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai, Dated 27.02.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai Dated 27.02.2017 In I.T.A.No.07/Cit(A)-9/2016-17 For The Above Mentioned Assessment Year Is Contrary To Law, Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Punna
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(47)(v)

short) or business income. Only the assessment year in which the income is chargeable to tax is the issue. The large residential housing project launched in the heart of the Chennai city, is estimated to make gross earnings close to about Rs.1500 crores in the next five years, involving big contribution to the exchequer

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES AND CHEMICALS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1584/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

short-term capital gain’ as held by the Ld.CIT(A). It is ordered accordingly. Thus Ground No.4.1 A(i) is disposed off. 6 Ground No.4.1 A(ii) : Treating the amount of expenditure of Rs.3,51,945/- incurred towards farming as the income of the assessee :- Since in the ground No.4.1 A(i), we have held that relief should be granted

JCIT (OSD), CHENNAI vs. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES & CHEMICALS PVT LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1571/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

short-term capital gain’ as held by the Ld.CIT(A). It is ordered accordingly. Thus Ground No.4.1 A(i) is disposed off. 6 Ground No.4.1 A(ii) : Treating the amount of expenditure of Rs.3,51,945/- incurred towards farming as the income of the assessee :- Since in the ground No.4.1 A(i), we have held that relief should be granted

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES AND CHEMICALS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 888/CHNY/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

short-term capital gain’ as held by the Ld.CIT(A). It is ordered accordingly. Thus Ground No.4.1 A(i) is disposed off. 6 Ground No.4.1 A(ii) : Treating the amount of expenditure of Rs.3,51,945/- incurred towards farming as the income of the assessee :- Since in the ground No.4.1 A(i), we have held that relief should be granted

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES & CHEMICALS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 3055/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

short-term capital gain’ as held by the Ld.CIT(A). It is ordered accordingly. Thus Ground No.4.1 A(i) is disposed off. 6 Ground No.4.1 A(ii) : Treating the amount of expenditure of Rs.3,51,945/- incurred towards farming as the income of the assessee :- Since in the ground No.4.1 A(i), we have held that relief should be granted

BHAVANI DISTILLERIS AND CHEMICALS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 814/CHNY/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

short-term capital gain’ as held by the Ld.CIT(A). It is ordered accordingly. Thus Ground No.4.1 A(i) is disposed off. 6 Ground No.4.1 A(ii) : Treating the amount of expenditure of Rs.3,51,945/- incurred towards farming as the income of the assessee :- Since in the ground No.4.1 A(i), we have held that relief should be granted

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. BHAVANI DISTILLERIES AND CHEMICALS LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 68/CHNY/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

Section 40

short-term capital gain’ as held by the Ld.CIT(A). It is ordered accordingly. Thus Ground No.4.1 A(i) is disposed off. 6 Ground No.4.1 A(ii) : Treating the amount of expenditure of Rs.3,51,945/- incurred towards farming as the income of the assessee :- Since in the ground No.4.1 A(i), we have held that relief should be granted

ARTHI BALIGA,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NFAC, , DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1559/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1559/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arthi Baliga, Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No. 15, Flat No. 3-C, Coral Woods Income Tax, Chennai-4, Apartment, Sri Ram Nagar, South Chennai. Street, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. [Pan:Bkjpb5416P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate & Shri Varun Ranganathan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai-4, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

short]. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 4 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find 2 I.T.A. No.1559/Chny/24 the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal

CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1180/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Milind S. Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Gains claimed by the assessee "2,04,45,542/-. 8.3 We have considered the facts and submissions made by the ld. Authorised Representative and Departmental Representative, were similar issue was adjudicated by us for the assessment year 2006-07 in ITA No.1181/Mds/2014 at para 5.18, we partly allow the ground of the assessee. 8.4. The last ground raised

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1431/CHNY/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Milind S. Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Gains claimed by the assessee "2,04,45,542/-. 8.3 We have considered the facts and submissions made by the ld. Authorised Representative and Departmental Representative, were similar issue was adjudicated by us for the assessment year 2006-07 in ITA No.1181/Mds/2014 at para 5.18, we partly allow the ground of the assessee. 8.4. The last ground raised

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , CHENNAI vs. SHRI MOHAMMED DAWOOD SULTAN ABDUL KADAR, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 25/CHNY/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.25/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Mohamed Dawood Sultan Abdul Income Tax, Circle 2, Kader, Kolikalpalayam, Thiruvarur, Trichy. Tamil Nadu 610 001. [Pan:Brdps5653L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sankaralingam, Cit (Retd.) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Trichy, Dated 23.09.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016-17. The Only Issue Involved In This Appeal Is Relating To The Land Acquisition Compensation Under Compulsory Acquisition By The Government Is Exempt Or Not.

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sankaralingam, CIT (Retd.)

TDS was deducted and net amount of ₹.4,67,65,534/- has been received by the assessee. Out of this amount, the assessee has deposited ₹.2,00,00,000/- into capital gain deposit scheme. The Assessing Officer has held that the asset is short term

ITO (IT), WARD 2(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. ROHITKUMAR NEMCHAND PIPARIA, CHENNAI

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1326/CHNY/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1326/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Income Tax Officer Shri Rohitkumar Nemchand Piparia बनाम International Taxation Ward-2(1), #34 (Old #77), Meddox Street, / Vs. Chennai. Choolai, Chennai-600 112. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akzpp-0661-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri T. Banusekar & Ms.Samyuktha Banusekar (Advocates) - Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07-10-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31-12-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar & Ms.SamyukthaFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Short Term Capital Gains was on the remitter banker. As a non-resident of more than 40 years, the assessee reasonably presumed that the entire TDS

DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. MUTHU DANIEL RAJAN, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1632/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1675/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mr.Muthu Daniel Rajan, V. The Asst. Commissioner- No.10, Appar Street, Of Income Tax, Kalakshetra Colony, Non-Corporate Circle-1(1), Besant Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 090. [Pan: Aadpd 9713 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.K.G.Raghunath, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.R.Bhoopathi, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 54F

short term capital gains’ and thus, we are inclined to uphold the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) and reject the ground taken by the Revenue. 9. In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No.1675/Chny/2019 for the AY 2013-14 is allowed & appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No.1727/Chny/2019 is dismissed. ITA No.1632/Chny/2019

MUTHU DANIEL RAJAN,CHENNAI vs. CIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1675/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1675/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mr.Muthu Daniel Rajan, V. The Asst. Commissioner- No.10, Appar Street, Of Income Tax, Kalakshetra Colony, Non-Corporate Circle-1(1), Besant Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 090. [Pan: Aadpd 9713 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.K.G.Raghunath, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.R.Bhoopathi, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 54F

short term capital gains’ and thus, we are inclined to uphold the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) and reject the ground taken by the Revenue. 9. In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No.1675/Chny/2019 for the AY 2013-14 is allowed & appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No.1727/Chny/2019 is dismissed. ITA No.1632/Chny/2019

DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. MUTHU DANIEL RAJAN, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1727/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1675/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mr.Muthu Daniel Rajan, V. The Asst. Commissioner- No.10, Appar Street, Of Income Tax, Kalakshetra Colony, Non-Corporate Circle-1(1), Besant Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 090. [Pan: Aadpd 9713 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.K.G.Raghunath, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.R.Bhoopathi, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 54F

short term capital gains’ and thus, we are inclined to uphold the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) and reject the ground taken by the Revenue. 9. In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No.1675/Chny/2019 for the AY 2013-14 is allowed & appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No.1727/Chny/2019 is dismissed. ITA No.1632/Chny/2019

MUTHUSAMY SHANMUGAM,CHENNAI vs. ITO, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 362/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.362/Chny/2023 िनधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Muthusamy Shanmugam, The Income Tax Officer, C/O.Ramesh & Ramachandran, Cas Vs. Ward-2(2), New No.39, Old No.29/3, Chennai. Viswanathapuram Main Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024. [Pan: Dghps-7897-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, F.C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, F.C.A ""For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 69

TDS amounting to Rs.8,40,34,976/- and refund of Rs. 3,54,77,480/-. Tax :- 5 -: was computed as per section 115E i.e. Tax on investment income and LTCG. 4. The ld. AO, thereafter, issued show-cause notice dated 26-03- 2022 to the assessee as under: “Reason: Bogus long term capital gains/ short