The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) failed to give a reasoned order on land ownership and capital-asset status. The case is remanded for fresh adjudication and proper hearing.
The ITAT held that without pinpointing specific defects in books or vouchers, an arbitrary ₹50 lakh disallowance cannot stand. The ruling confirms that estimation cannot replace factual verification.
A genuine FTC claim of ₹1.03 crore was partly disallowed due to a technical placement error in Form 67. The Tribunal restored the claim and sent it to the AO for verification and proper allowance.
ITAT held that the assessee operated as a commission agent, not a trader, making Section 44AD inapplicable. A reasonable 5% estimation on cash deposits was upheld.
The ITAT ruled that unresolved legal grounds—especially on reassessment validity—must first be decided by the CIT(A). The ₹3.32 crore Section 69A addition is remanded for proper adjudication.
ITAT confirmed Rs.2.92 crore long-term capital gain as the assessee failed to prove that the land sold was used for agriculture, sustaining the AO’s and CIT(A)’s orders.
ITAT Pune deletes Rs.17.90L addition u/s 68 as LLP proved genuineness, identity & repayment of unsecured loans; appeal allowed in full.
ITAT Pune restored LTCG issue for AY 2015-16 to CIT(A)/NFAC, directing assessee to submit cost details & evidences, ensuring proper verification and fair adjudication.
ITAT Pune held that the CIT(A) failed to adjudicate key legal grounds, including wrong AO jurisdiction and missing Document Identification Number. Entire order under Section 144 r.w.s. 263 was set aside for reconsideration with proper hearing.
Tribunal remands ₹88 lakh disallowance of long-term service award to the AO for fresh verification as employee-wise computation for the relevant year was not on record. Claim can be allowed only after proper quantification of ascertained liability.
