The ITAT bench of Pune in the case of M/s Thermotech Engineering held that where the assessee has earned exempt income and incurred expenditure by way of interest which is not directly attributable to any particular income
ITAT Pune held In the case of Shri Ajit Ramchandra Jadhav. vs. ACIT that the order initiating the penalty proceedings has to be a different order and has to be passed by the person, who has made the addition / assessment in the hands of the assessee.
For invoking revisionary powers the Commissioner of Income Tax has to exercise his own discretion and judgment. Here the Commissioner of Income Tax has invoked the provisions of section 263 at the mere suggestion of the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
ITAT Pune held In the case of Span Overseas Ltd. vs. CIT that from the show cause notice, it is clear that the CIT has invoked the provisions of section 263 on the proposal submitted by the DCIT and deficiencies in the assessment order pointed out by the DCIT.
ITAT Pune held In the case of M/s. Meta Rolls & Commodities Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT that in the instant assessment year i.e. 2010-11, there is no order of Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs and there is no evidence of any clandestine removal of goods without payment of Excise duty
ITAT Pune held In the case of M/s. D.J. Malpani vs. ACIT that in respect of the assessments which are completed prior to the date of search, no fresh claim of deduction can be made by the assessee. Therefore in the given case, assessee is not entitled to make a fresh claim in the return filed u/s.153A
ITAT Pune held In the case of ACIT vs. M/s. Nilesh Steel & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. that the consumption of the electricity for the manufacture of mild steel ingots/billets depends on various factors like quality of raw material which is the major input, voltage of the supply
In the case of D.C.I.T. vs Autoline Industries Ltd, Pune Tribunal held that foreign exchange cover taken by the assessee from DBS Bank was in order to prevent itself from future currency rate fluctuations. Later, it had to close its agreement with DBS Bank in view of the offer made by the principal lender i.e. Citi Bank.
In the case of D.C.I.T. vs Autoline Industries Ltd, Pune Tribunal on the issue whether a particular expenditure is of nature of capital or revenue held that the law on the issue is that the accounting treatment given by the assessee in its books of account is not determinative whether or not the expenditure is allowable as a deduction.
ITAT Pune held In the case of ACIT vs. RDS Construction Pvt. Ltd. that on the matter of adjustment of seized cash with the self assessment tax, we find no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) since the assessee vide letter dated 30-03-2010
