ITAT Pune partially allows appeal in Amrutlal Gangaji Choudhary Vs. DCIT. Section 68 addition lacks cogent reasons. Remanded for de novo adjudication.
Inox Air Products Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) The issue in the present appeal relates to the subsidy received by the assessee company is whether in the nature of capital or revenue. There is no need to extract the schemes of the subsidy policies of the respective States as the Assessing Officer had set […]
Surana Mutha Bhasali Developers Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) The doctrine of approbate and reprobate does not allow the Department to blow hot and cold in the same breath, thereby accepting one consequence arising from the statement of the assessee while rejecting the other one. When the assessee made a surrender with the clear backdrop of […]
Bank of India – Kirkee Branch Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) Conclusion: In present facts of the case, it was held by the Hon’ble Tribunal that expired time limit does not get revived with the extended time limit inserted later on. Held: In present facts of the case, the assessee-bank accepted deposits from its customers, on […]
Hyundai Construction Equipment India Private Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) Ground no.8 of the appeal is against making transfer pricing adjustment on entity level rather than restricting it to the AE transactions. The TPO computed the transfer pricing addition by considering revenues from Manufacturing segment‘ in totality at the entity level The DRP did not […]
TPO determined ALP on the combined accounts approach rather than the split approach adopted by assessee as assessee failed to substantiate such common material costs were properly allocated segment-wise and Transfer Pricing Adjustment made at entity level should be restricted to international transactions only.
The Hon’ble Tribunal provided relief to the assesse for AY 2014-15 by making its reliance on section 90(2) of Act and observed that the provisions of the Act or the DTAA, whichever are more beneficial to the assessee would apply making the receipt from sale of software license as not chargeable to tax in India.
everting to the CUP method applied by assessee as the most appropriate method for benchmarking the SDT of rent payment, assessee had given a comparable instance of rent paid @ Rs.112 per sq.ft. by ICICI bank under a lease agreement dated 17.02.2012 for a nearby premises. As against that, the assessee paid rent @ Rs.75.28 per sq.ft., which showed that the rent paid by assessee was less in comparison with the comparable uncontrolled transaction. Thus, the ALP of the Specified Domestic Tranasction of payment of rent could not be disputed.
Shree Lakadipool Vitthal Mandir Vs CIT (Exemption) (ITAT Pune) In the present case, the objects of the trust are not doubted by the Department and they have also not disputed the charitable nature of the activities conducted by the assessee trust. Meaning thereby, all the relevant records were submitted before the Ld. CIT(Exemption) and he […]
Ganpati Zilla Krishi Audyogik Sar Seva Sahakari Society Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) The contention of Ld. AR that a Review petition has been filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the judgment in the case of CIT Vs Tasgaon SSK Ltd. (2019) 412 ITR 420 (SC) which is still pending and hence the decision […]
