The Tribunal held that the reassessment notice issued on 26.07.2022 was beyond the permissible timeline under the surviving limitation principle and therefore lacked legal validity.
Tribunal ruled that unsold flats shown as stock-in-trade by a real estate developer cannot attract notional rent taxation. The decision relied on earlier judicial precedents recognizing such assets as part of business operations.
The Pune ITAT held that reassessment proceedings become void when approval under Section 151 is taken from the wrong authority. Since sanction was obtained from the PCIT instead of the PCCIT, the notice under Section 148 was quashed.
The Tribunal ruled that CPC’s application of a 30% tax rate merely due to absence of turnover disclosure in the return form could not override the concessional rate provided by law.
Pune ITAT held that once the Assessing Officer accepted the explanation for cash deposits, reassessment could not continue on a completely new issue without issuing a fresh notice under Section 148.
The Pune ITAT ruled that purchases cannot automatically be disallowed merely because suppliers failed to reply to notices issued under Section 133(6). The Tribunal restored the matter for fresh verification after considering documentary evidence produced by the assessee.
The Pune ITAT held that reassessment beyond four years based on the same hawala purchase material already examined during scrutiny amounted to a mere change of opinion. The reassessment proceedings were therefore quashed as invalid.
The Pune ITAT held that entire cash deposits in bank accounts cannot automatically be treated as unexplained income when the assessee appears to be only a conduit in an accommodation entry network. The Tribunal restricted the taxable addition to 2% of deposits after finding no evidence of actual enrichment.
Pune ITAT held that accounting reclassification entries and journal adjustments require proper verification before being treated as unexplained income. The matter was remanded after admitting additional evidence.
Pune ITAT held that penalty for under-reporting of income cannot survive where the Assessing Officer accepts the income declared in response to notice under Section 148 without any addition. The Tribunal deleted the entire penalty under Section 270A.
