ITAT Pune held that sum has been received for work relating to interior and other finishing work and total consideration is received through banking channel. Hence, there is no violation of section 269SS of the Income Tax Act. Hence, penalty u/s. 271D not leviable. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
Tribunal held that write-off of ₹9.56 crore foreign investment in USA subsidiary was incurred for commercial expediency and business expansion, qualifying as business loss under the Income Tax Act.
The ITAT Pune set aside the CIT(A)’s order that had restricted a bogus purchase addition of ₹2.53 crore to a 12.5% profit element. The matter was remanded to the AO for fresh adjudication to ensure the application of the binding ruling from the jurisdictional Bombay High Court regarding 100% disallowance in hawala purchase cases.
Relying on binding Supreme Court and High Court precedents, the Tribunal set aside the revisionary order as legally invalid because the PCIT failed to bring the legal heir on record before passing the order. The ruling firmly establishes that an income tax order passed against a dead person is a nullity and cannot be enforced.
The ITAT Pune dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, ruling against additions for ICDS adjustments, provision reversals (including liquidated damages and project costs), and Section 40(a)(ia) disallowance. The Tribunal held that subsequent reversal of provisions cannot be taxed again if the original provision was disallowed in earlier years, thereby preventing double taxation and upholding consistent accounting treatment.
ITAT Pune sets aside NFAC’s ex-parte order, mandating fresh adjudication on S. 44AD applicability to commission income, citing violation of natural justice and lack of proper notice.
ITAT Pune dismissed Revenue’s appeal against Mukund Bhavan Trust, confirming its Sections 11 & 12 exemption. It ruled Sections 13(1)(b) & 13(1)(c) restrictions don’t apply to pre-1961 trusts with protected founding conditions.
Pune ITAT set aside a CIT(E) order, ruling that a wrong clause in Form 10AB isn’t fatal. Directs CIT(E) to allow rectification & reconsider 12AB registration/80G approval.
Pune ITAT set aside a CIT(E) revision against PYC Gymkhana, ruling the AO’s view was plausible since business receipts were below the 20% limit in Section 2(15) Proviso (ii).
Pune ITAT set aside a PCIT’s Section 263 revisionary order against Ravindra Chavan, ruling the “Hear the Other Side” rule was breached by relying on un-confronted material.
