9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sriraman For the Respondents : Mrs. S. Premalatha Jr. Standing Counsel ORDER The petitioner challenges an assessment order dated 30.11.2023 in respect of Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The proceedings culminating in the impugned assessment order originated from the the return of income filed by the petitioner for Assessment Year 2017-18 on 11.08.2017. In the notice under Section 148 of the Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t a waiting the valuation report. An explanation was also provided with regard to the proposed 2nd and 3rd additions and it was contended that such additions are not warranted. 3. By referring to the said reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is unsustainable. He submits that the respondents had a further four months in which to complete the assessment, whereas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is added to the income of the assessee for the year under consideration. If there is difference in the market value of the property purchased as accepted by the District Valuation Officer and the value taken by the FAO as per the sale deed, then the assessee make seek remedial action from the Ld. CIT(A)/ Jurisdictional Assessing Officer as per law. Hence, the difference amount of Rs. 54,64,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le. 7. As regards the addition on account of rent receipts, the petitioner provided an explanation that rent was received towards a residential house property and that the income was duly disclosed. The petitioner further explained that tax had been wrongly deducted under Section 194IB instead of Section 194C of the Income-tax Act and that the petitioner should not be put to prejudice on that acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
