THIRUVENGADAMUDALIAR RAMALINGAM,ARNI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1830/Chny/2024 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2020-21 Thiruvengadamudaliar Ramalingam The Principal Commissioner Of No.4, Big Sayakara Street, Vs. Income Tax (Central), Kosapalayam, Chennai-1. Arni – 632 301. [Pan: Aacpr 1690P]

69B of the Act. The Ld AR submitted that the assessee has filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the addition and the matter is pending before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore the Ld. PCIT does not have jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act. The Ld. AR has further submitted that the A.O during assessment proceedings

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MUTHULAKSHMI VELLAISAMY, TIRUPUR

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

house\nproperty and consequently claiming exemption under section 54,\nthe seller filed the computation of income paying Rs. 1,83,576\nas tax, which was quite evident from the conflicting statements\ngiven by the seller and the conflicting income-tax returns filed by\nhim that his action of admitting sale consideration and paying tax\nwas nothing but an obvious effort

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. SHRI JAYA PRADEEP, CHENNAI

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

house for family expenses and educational expenses of his\ndaughter, respectively. It was also noted that the revised return was filed by\nthe seller wherein he had shown approximately Rs.2.5 lakhs being available\nwith him in cash. Even after giving the retraction and admitting that he had\nsold the property for a sale consideration of Rs.4.10 lakhs, the seller filed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. GNANAGURU LAVANYA, TIRUPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

house\nproperty and consequently claiming exemption under section 54,\nthe seller filed the computation of income paying Rs. 1,83,576\nas tax, which was quite evident from the conflicting statements\ngiven by the seller and the conflicting income-tax returns filed by\nhim that his action of admitting sale consideration and paying tax\nwas nothing but an obvious effort