Shri Sohanlal Mohanlal Bhandari Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) Adverting to the facts of the instant case, it is seen from pages 5 and 6 of the impugned order that the assessee acquired land in two parts for construction of a new residential house, viz, the first part of the plot purchased on 11.10.2010 and the […]
As intention of assessee to continue the business was clear, business expenditure including, depreciation as claimed by the assessee could not be disallowed due to temporary restrictions.
rofessional fee paid to the trustees, who were qualified doctors were allowable as deduction as it could not be held to be for the direct or indirect benefit of trustees.
Shri Ratanlal C. Bafna Vs JCIT (ITAT Pune) When appeal has been filed before the Hon’ble High Court, the appeal is admitted and substantial question of law has been framed in the said appeal, then the Tribunal cannot recall the order. In the present case since the appeal against the order of the Tribunal has […]
Shamim Imtiaz Hingora Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) It is an undisputed fact that the shares involved are Penny Stocks and the Assessing Officer did not find any mistake in the documentation furnished by the assessee. The Assessing Officer alleges that the documentation is self-serving. After considering both sides ITAT held that there is need for […]
DCIT Vs Dr. Ravindra Babasaheb Kadam (ITAT Pune) The issue in the present ground is with respect to levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. It is an undisputed fact that additional income of Rs.1.49 crores was offered by the assessee during the course of survey conducted on 12.01.2012. It is also a fact […]
Assessee was not entitled to claim of deduction under section 54F as assessee had failed to deposit the unutilized amount of capital gains in the capital gains scheme account by the due date of filing of return of income.
In view of section 92CA(4) as substituted by Finance Act, 2007 w.e.f. 1-6-2007, AO was bound by the order passed by TPO as he is required to compute total income in conformity with the ALP determined by TPO.
Murtuza Shabbir Jamnagarwala Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) Conclusion: Assessee was entited for exemption u/s. 54B as the land transferred by assessee was “Jirayat” type of agricultural land and the same was cultivated land as “Jowar crop” was grown on the same in last four years in line. Held: Assessee, along with other two co-owners, entered […]
Payment for removal of encumbrances is deductible u/s 48 (1) as expenses incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with transfer. Accordingly, value of flat allotted to Shri Uday should be accordingly reduced from the full value of consideration u/s 48.
