Search: disallowance

5 results for “disallowance”+ Section 54Gclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai19 Delhi18 Bangalore14 Kolkata8 Jaipur7 Agra6 Pune5 Karnataka5 Indore5 Chennai5 Ahmedabad4 Rajkot4 Visakhapatnam2 Hyderabad2 Jodhpur2 Chandigarh1 Cochin1 Cuttack1 Raipur1 SC1 Surat1

Key Topics

Section 54B14 Section 54F9 Section 271(1)(c)9 Section 44A6 Deduction5 Section 2503 Business Income3 Penalty3 Addition to Income3 Condonation of Delay

AMOL VASANT DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 1837/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sarang Gudhate, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi, Addl.CIT

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 54B

54G and 54GA & Large Investment in property (AIR) as compared to total income". However, Ld Assessing Officer has travelled beyond the scope of limited scrutiny by reclassifying the nature of income and making an addition under the head "Business Income", which is contrary to the scope of enquiry permitted under the limited scrutiny guidelines. Hence addition is not sustainable. Accordingly

AMOL VASANT DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

AMOL VASANT DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

TULSABAI VASANT DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

ROHINI MARUTI DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(3), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, PUNE vs. KALAWATI VIJAYKUMAR AGARWAL, PUNE

BHANUDAS VITTHAL MHASURKAR,PUNE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), PUNE, PUNE