https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279491 The Tribunal upheld the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A), rejecting the appellant's challenge due to proper notice issuance and multiple adjournment requests. Regarding the denial of deduction u/s 24 of the Income Tax Act, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that depreciation claimed on a property as a business asset precluded it from being considered a house property for deduction purposes. However, the Tribunal allowed the appeal partially by deleting adhoc disallowances of Travelling & Conveyance Expenses and Freight Expenses, finding them unsustainable without specific defects in account maintenance. en-us Wed, 20 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Mar 2019 18:33:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279491 The Tribunal upheld the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A), rejecting the appellant's challenge due to proper notice issuance and multiple adjournment requests. Regarding the denial of deduction u/s 24 of the Income Tax Act, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that depreciation claimed on a property as a business asset precluded it from being considered a house property for deduction purposes. However, the Tribunal allowed the appeal partially by deleting adhoc disallowances of Travelling & Conveyance Expenses and Freight Expenses, finding them unsustainable without specific defects in account maintenance. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 20 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279491