<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1980 (3) TMI 162 - ITAT MADRAS-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69735</link>
    <description>The reassessment under Section 147(a) of the IT Act, 1961 was deemed justified due to non-disclosure of material facts. The Tribunal upheld the inclusion of Rs. 14,65,227 as taxable income, rejecting the Department&#039;s claim for the entire amount of Rs. 17,14,621. The disallowance of Rs. 2,25,000 paid to Shri Mallick was confirmed as a personal liability. The market value of the property as on 1st Jan., 1954 was upheld at Rs. 2,28,000. Legal expenses disallowance was partially overturned, allowing Rs. 20,000. The claim for solatium and the cost of improvement were denied. The departmental appeal was dismissed, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was partly allowed with a relief of Rs. 20,000.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 17:52:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=108096" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (3) TMI 162 - ITAT MADRAS-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69735</link>
      <description>The reassessment under Section 147(a) of the IT Act, 1961 was deemed justified due to non-disclosure of material facts. The Tribunal upheld the inclusion of Rs. 14,65,227 as taxable income, rejecting the Department&#039;s claim for the entire amount of Rs. 17,14,621. The disallowance of Rs. 2,25,000 paid to Shri Mallick was confirmed as a personal liability. The market value of the property as on 1st Jan., 1954 was upheld at Rs. 2,28,000. Legal expenses disallowance was partially overturned, allowing Rs. 20,000. The claim for solatium and the cost of improvement were denied. The departmental appeal was dismissed, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was partly allowed with a relief of Rs. 20,000.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69735</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>