Search: house property

6 results for “house property”+ Section 69Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur53 Mumbai34 Bangalore26 Pune13 Delhi12 Chandigarh12 Amritsar8 Indore8 Chennai7 Cochin6 Raipur6 Hyderabad5 Cuttack4 Jodhpur2 Visakhapatnam1 Allahabad1 Nagpur1 Rajkot1 SC1 Surat1 Varanasi1 Ahmedabad1

Key Topics

Section 115B20 Section 6812 Section 26310 Section 143(3)8 Section 1477 Section 69A5 Section 695 Section 1154 Unexplained Investment3 Survey u/s 133A

SRI.P.V.RAVINDRAN,KANNUR vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 302/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Sreedharan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shantam Bose, CIT DR

Section 115BSection 263Section 3(1)(b)Section 68

69D alone. Moreover, such income should be reflected in the return of income furnished u/s 139 or the income determined by the Assessing Officer should include any income referred to in the aforementioned Sections of the Act. In such an event, the calculation of income tax is specifically governed by the provisions of Sec.115BBE. It is submitted that the above

SRI.P.V.RAVINDRAN,KANNUR vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

SRI.P.V.RAVINDRAN,KANNUR vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

SHRI.P.V. RAVEENDRAN,KANNUR vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

SRI UMA MAHESHWARA RAO CHINNI,GUNTUR vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

SRI SRAVAN KUMAR NEELA,NALGONDA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, KOZHIKODE

SHAHUL HAMEED,MANANTHAVADY vs. ITO, WARD-2, KALPETTA

BHIMA JEWELLERS,SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD vs. THE PR CIT, KOZHIKKODE, KOZHIKKODE