The issue was whether revision under section 263 could survive when no incriminating material was found for an unabated year. The tribunal held that without search-based evidence, the completed assessment could not be disturbed.
The issue was whether delayed filing of Form 10B bars exemption for a charitable trust. The Tribunal held the delay to be procedural and sustained exemption since audit was completed and report filed during appellate proceedings.
The Tribunal held that a 3,134-day delay deserved condonation where the assessee proved non-service of the assessment order. The key takeaway is that absence of service constitutes sufficient cause and justice cannot be denied on limitation alone.
ITAT Pune held that disallowance of interest paid on housing loan is upheld since assessee has failed to provide documentary evidence like loan sanction letter or bank certificate. Accordingly, ground raised by assessee is dismissed.
ITAT Pune held that provision of interest on loan from state government is ascertained liability and hence couldn’t be disallowed under section 37 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
The dispute concerned denial of TDS credit solely due to non-reflection in Form 26AS. The Tribunal held that Form 26AS is not conclusive and factual deduction of tax overrides system mismatch.
Despite Form 10E being duly filed online, the claim under section 89(1) was rejected on technical grounds. The Tribunal held that such rigidity defeats justice and directed the AO to examine the claim afresh.
The dispute arose from survey-based additions relying mainly on a statement and impounded agreement. The Tribunal held that the matter needed fresh examination and remanded it to the AO with one final opportunity.
ITAT Pune admitted affidavits and satellite images showing land under cultivation, restoring the issue to AO for reassessment. Proper evidence can overturn non-agri classification for capital gains.
ITAT Pune struck down a ₹34.28 lakh penalty issued after the company had merged, citing substantive illegality. Penalty orders must be issued in the name of a legally existing entity.
