DCIT vs. Smt. Suman Jagannath Pharande (ITAT Pune) For the contention of inclusion of Canopy area in total built area, the ITAT held that built up area means the inner measurement of the residential unit at the floor level, including the projection and balconies, as increased by the thickness of the walls but does not include the common area shared with other residential units.
VAT collected by the assessee was in respect of traded goods dealt in by the assessee and in view of the provisions of section 145A of the Act, the value of the VAT was to be included as part of sale consideration of the traded goods and once the same is to be included as part of the sale goods
In the case of ACIT Vs. Dr. Nitin Laxmikant Lad Pune Bench of ITAT have held that where assessee had furnished original return of income in which he had not declared its receipts from the profession, but pursuant to the search and seizure operation, certain incriminating documents were seized
The Serendipity Apparels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)- The assessee has derived its lease rental income under the head from other sources. There is no dispute that the same is covered u/s.56(2)(iii) of the Act.
ITAT Pune held In the case of M/s. Vishay Components India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT that where the revenue from year to year has accepted the method adopted by the assessee for benchmarking its international transactions with its associate enterprises, in the absence of any reasons brought
In this case During scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer inter alia disallowed writing off of bad debts of M/s. Kinetic Motor Co. Ltd. amounting to Rs.1,27,58,427/- as the same was Group Concern and AO further claimed that The debts have been written off as bad debts only to suppress the income.
Bhujbal Brothers Construction Company V/s. DCIT (ITAT Pune) Deduction u/s. 80I1B(10) on housing project at Damodar Residency has been denied primarily on two counts(i) the area of the housing project is less than 1 acre, and (ii) the land on which the housing project has been developed does not belong to the assessee.
Shri Vinit Ranawat vs. ACIT (ITAT Pune)- Referring to the provisions of section 153A he submitted that the same is to be invoked for making an assessment of the person searched on the basis of the material found during the course of search on that person.
In case of Prabhat Chandra S Jain Vs. ACIT Pune bench of ITAT have held that where it is not established that name PC Jain of Mumbai written in the said document was in fact the assessee before us and in the absence of any evidence having been found to establish that the assessee
ITAT Delhi held in the case American Express (India) Private Limited vs. DCIT that even though the assessee in its TP study has included the turnover filter of less than Rs.1 crore, the assessee has given reasons for inclusion of these two companies in the list of comparables
