Vishal Constructions Vs. ITO (ITAT Pune) We note that in the present appeal the assessee claimed deduction Rs.18,80,000/- u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act. The AO held that the assessee has violated the provisions of section 80IB(10) of the Act as built up area of shops and commercial establishments exceeded 5000 sq. ft. For such violation […]
Mrs. Kamal Murlidhar Mokashi Vs. ITO (ITAT Pune) Capital Gain-Purchased 4 Adjacent Residential Flats- Can Claim Exemption U/S 54F (With Provisions of Section 54F) In this article I will discuss some clarification (with the judgment of a recent case law) regarding the provisions of Section 54F i.e. Exemption from Capital Gain on purchase of Residential […]
Jadhav Kangralkar Builders Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune) We find that there is no dispute regarding the business of assessee and earning Rs.200/- extra over and above regular income for selling 37,752 sq. ft. in Aayodhya Nagari project. From the day one i.e. from date of survey as discussed above, the assessee was contended the amount […]
The issue under consideration is whether the Penalty u/s 271F will be levied for non filing of Income Tax Return even in case of reasonable cause?
Deoyani Movies Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) No Penalty can be Levied on Cash Deposits if Assessee Explained its Source from Earlier Withdrawal and Recorded in Books of Accounts Simply because cash deposited in the bank is a little more than the cash sales, it cannot call for any addition, what to talk of […]
Bhagwan Keshu Sakhare Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) The issue under consideration is whether CIT is correct in denial of exemption u/s 54B of the Act? In the present case, the case of assessee is selected for limited scrutiny under CASS for the reason of “Deduction claimed under the head capital gains”. After claiming deduction for […]
The issue under consideration is whether the payment made by the company to its employees under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) is allowed as deduction?
Whether the ex-parte order of the CIT(Exemptions) denying 80G exemption is justified in law? ITAT dismissed ex-parte order of CIT(E) on the basis of principles of natural justice
Issues have been examined by the A.O and just because the opinion as arrived by the A.O is at a variation of the opinion of the learned Pr. CIT, would not grant the learned Pr. CIT the powers of revision u/s 263 of the Act.
Existence of reasons for escapement of income are sine qua non to embark upon the assessment or reassessment u/s 147 of the Act. Change or no change of opinion, as argued by the ld. DR, are the factors to be considered after fulfilling the jurisdictional condition of there being an escapement of income, in the absence of which no assessment or reassessment can be made u/s 147.
