It is seen that the assessee is maintaining regular books of accounts. The first item is of Rs. 20,50,000/- claimed to have been received from farmers out of advances made in the preceding year.
AO observed that the assessee deposited cash of Rs.17.00 lakh in his bank account on different dates during the demonetization period.
it has been clearly brought out that this flat was never used for any business purposes of the assessee-company and whatever evidences have been produced in the form of leave and licence agreement, minutes of Board meeting, etc. fall in the category of self-serving documents.
ITAT Pune held that once a revised return is filed within the time permitted u/s.139(5), it substitutes the original return in all respects. Accordingly, claim of enhanced amount of carry forward of loss vide revised return is allowable.
ITAT Pune held that default in allotting ‘DIN and Order’ results into quashing of the impugned assessment as according to CBDT circular no. 19/2019 dated 14.08.2019 such an order ought to be treated as to have never been issued herein.
ITAT Pune held that order u/s 119 dated 27.09.2019 extending due date to 31.10.2019 in respect of cases covered under Explanation 2(a) to section 139(1) applies to HUF too. Accordingly, as return by HUF filed within extended time limit, deduction u/s 80IA(7) of Income Tax Act allowable.
Aggreko Energy Rental India Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune) ITAT Pune held that appellate authority has power to entertain any new claim for the first time though not made before the Assessing Officer as the intention of the revenue would be to tax real income. Accordingly, revised claim of depreciation on goodwill made otherwise […]
Appellant builder treated Property as stock-in-trade & profits on its sale would be offered as business income and no rental income was received by Appellant from Property.
ITAT Pune held that as NFAC dismissed the claim of deduction u/s 80P on legal issue without considering the case on merits, matter remanded back for fresh adjudication.
The issue in the present appeal relates to the exigibility of penalty u/s 271B for failure of the assessee to get accounts audited in respect of the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration as required u/s 44AB and furnished to the Assessing Officer before specified due date i.e. due date for filing the return of income.
