<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (5) TMI 1406 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771134</link>
    <description>The ITAT Pune dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal in a case involving addition under section 68 for loans from three parties and disallowance of purchases. The CIT(A) had deleted the section 68 addition after finding the assessee&#039;s explanations satisfactory, with the Department unable to controvert the details provided. Regarding purchase disallowance, despite the assessee&#039;s turnover increasing from Rs. 0.30 crore to Rs. 4.64 crore, the ITAT upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision noting the assessee declared 9.34% net profit, which exceeded the 8% presumptive rate under section 44AD. The purchases were supported by invoices, banking payments, and TDS deductions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 May 2025 08:29:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=823144" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 1406 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771134</link>
      <description>The ITAT Pune dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal in a case involving addition under section 68 for loans from three parties and disallowance of purchases. The CIT(A) had deleted the section 68 addition after finding the assessee&#039;s explanations satisfactory, with the Department unable to controvert the details provided. Regarding purchase disallowance, despite the assessee&#039;s turnover increasing from Rs. 0.30 crore to Rs. 4.64 crore, the ITAT upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision noting the assessee declared 9.34% net profit, which exceeded the 8% presumptive rate under section 44AD. The purchases were supported by invoices, banking payments, and TDS deductions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771134</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>