ITAT Pune held that as enhanced cost of acquisition not substantiated with cogent evidence, the same is not allowable as cost of acquisition of transferred assets.
ITAT Pune held that the conclusion arrived by AO on his satisfaction of details furnished by the assessee, cannot be found to be erroneous simply because Pr. CIT does not feel satisfied with the said conclusion. Accordingly, invocation of revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 unjustified.
ITAT Pune held that revisionary proceedings under section 263 sustained as AO failed to apply proper and correct section of Income Tax Act to the investment in the undisclosed stock.
Explore the ITAT Pune ruling on the disallowance of car expenses incurred by a private limited company for personal use by directors, citing relevant case law and legal principles.
ITAT held that no addition is maintainable on deemed rent on unsold flats which are shown as stock-in-trade. Dugad Properties Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune)
Klug Avalon Mechatronics Private Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) ITAT held that a person is liable to deduct any sum under the provisions of chapter XVII of the Act, is under obligation to deliver or furnish a statement u/s 200(3) of the Act within the due date prescribed therein and in the event of default, […]
Ketan Sahebrao Purkar Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) The issue involved in the present appeal is whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant is liable to deduct tax at source u/s 194H in respect of expenditure claimed to have been debited to Profit & Loss Account under head “commission”. Without delving into […]
ITAT Pune held that contribution of undivided title and rights in the land as share of capital in AOP is taxable under section 45(3) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Pune held that claim of indexed cost of development not acceptable as assessee failed to furnish any evidence towards the same.
Dinesh Sitaram Patil Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) We note that, while culminating the reassessment proceeding in the case of the assessee, the Ld. AO vide concluding para placed at page 4 of his order communicated the assessee his action of initiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of Act for ‘under reporting / mis-reporting’ of income […]
