Search: section 68

2 results for “section 68”+ Section 35Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai93 Delhi80 Ahmedabad41 Chennai30 Bangalore19 Raipur19 Hyderabad11 Chandigarh11 Kolkata9 Karnataka6 Rajkot5 Cuttack3 Jaipur3 Cochin2 SC2 Pune2 Indore1 Amritsar1 Guwahati1 Agra1 Nagpur1 Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 15418 Section 35D4 Section 143(3)4 Section 142(1)2 Section 154(1)2 Deduction2 Addition to Income2 Revision u/s 2632

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE vs. IMPERIAL HOUSING, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1120/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(1)Section 35D

section 35D of the Act, the assessee was eligible to claim one fifth of the project cost i.e. Rs.68,87,660/-. Non restriction of claim has resulted in excess allowance of deduction of Rs.2,75,50,640/- (3,44,38,300- 68

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE vs. IMPERIAL HOUSING, PUNE

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE vs. IMPERIAL HOUSING, PUNE

IMPERIAL HOUSING, PUNE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE