ITAT held that transaction of receipt of donation is a sham, a make believe story, a device adopted by appellant society to bring on record undisclosed income
Held that as the assessee is in windmill’s power generation business, additional depreciation available for windmill u/s 32(1)(iia).
Reopening reasons have to be read on standalone basis without any scope of addition, deletion or substitution therein even if supportive material emerges at a later stage.
The new auditor, as per the established procedure, sought a no objection from the earlier auditor, who raised certain objections. Those issues were resolved later on, which led to the delay in the audit of the accounts of the assessee.
Explore the ITAT Pune ruling in Karandikar Enterprises vs. ACIT case. Victory for the assessee on the treatment of entertainment tax subsidy as a capital receipt, with detailed analysis.
Assessee did not submitted necessary details before AO. CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO on this score without calling for the remand report. Tribunal set-aside the impugned order.
The assessee rent for the property which remained vacant for the entire year shall be calculated as per provisions of Section 23(1)(a) of the Act. Section 23(1)(c) will not be applicable in such case.
ITAT find that the assessee has not been able to bring out genuine reasons, firstly, for such a huge delay of 1103 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and also why the assessee irrespective of being given eight opportunities by the ld. CIT(A) did not present himself or through his authorised representative before the first appellate authority.
Explore Ravindra Dattu Jadhav vs. ITO case: Uncovering undisclosed income in land trading, agricultural activity dispute. ITAT Pune modifies CIT(A) order, restricts addition to 50%.
Explore the case of Nitin Madhukar Rathi vs. DCIT at ITAT Pune involving unsecured loans and unexplained cash deposits. CIT(A) partially grants relief, but Rs. 38,00,000 addition confirmed.
