My Profile
Active Members
TodayLast 7 Days
more...
Awards & Gifts
Online Exams
Fresher Jobs
Our fresher job section is exclusively for fresh graduates! Find jobs for freshers in major Indian
cities including Bangalore, Chennai, Hyderabad, Pune or Kochi
Resources
Find educational articles, blogs, discussion threads and other resources.
Colleges
Find details about any college in India or search for courses.
Paid Surveys
|
Court admits Income-Tax department’s appeals in Tamil nadu
Posted Date: 29 Apr 2008 Resource Type: Articles/Knowledge Sharing Category: News
|
Posted By: vijay kumar Member Level: Diamond
Rating:  Points: 5
|
|
|
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Monday admitted appeals filed by the Income-Tax department against the orders of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras-B Bench in January on 12 appeals of the former Chief Minister, Jayalalithaa, for the assessment years starting from 1993-94 to 1997-98.
According to the IT department, as the assessee did not file her returns for the respective assessment years, the assessing officer completed the assessment and determined the income from various heads including rental income, dividend income from shares, agricultural income and the cost of construction of compound walls in Hyderabad property and at the two houses at Poes Garden here, marriage expenses of V.N. Sudhagaran and concealment of income.
Aggrieved by this, Ms. Jayalalithaa filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) (appeals) which made some modifications in the order of the assessing officer.
Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (appeals), 14 appeals were filed before the IT Appellate Tribunal. The tribunal allowed two appeals of the department.
It accepted the major contentions of Ms. Jayalalithaa.
T.Andhiarujina and P.Wilson, appearing for the income-tax department, contended before Justices K. Raviraja Pandian and P.P.S. Janarthana Raja that the Tribunal had given 15 per cent concession to her for the construction of the property at Poes Garden on the ground of self-supervision. When the assessee had time to supervise the construction, the same diligence should have been given for filing the returns in time. They also contended that she had suppressed certain facts.
|
Responses
|
No responses found. Be the first to respond and make money from revenue sharing program.
|
|
|