1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>High Court to Review Provisions for Costs, Tax Credit Disallowance, and Interest Levy</h1> The High Court admitted the appeal on Questions (a), (b), (c), and (d) regarding the assessment of provisions for costs on completed and incomplete ... - Issues involved: Assessment of provisions for costs on completed contracts, provisions for loss on incomplete contracts, disallowance of credit for tax deducted at source, levy of interest under Section 234D.Assessment of provisions for costs on completed contracts and loss on incomplete contracts: The Appellant-Assessee raised questions regarding the disallowance of provisions for costs on completed contracts and provisions for loss on incomplete contracts. The total amount in question was Rs. 8,61,19,588. The Appellant argued that these provisions were identified, determined, and ascertained present liabilities payable in respect of completed and incomplete contracts, and therefore should be allowable. The Tribunal was criticized for not appreciating the reality of the situation where liabilities actually arose during the year and the provisions were existing as on 31st March, 2003, determined based on technical assessments. The Appellant contended that these liabilities were ascertained, crystallized, and determined, making them allowable expenses.Disallowance of credit for tax deducted at source: The Tribunal was accused of wrongly interpreting the provisions of section 199 of the Income Tax Act and not following the Tribunal's order in the Appellant's own case for the preceding year. The Appellant challenged the confirmation of the withdrawal of credit for tax deducted at source, arguing that the Tribunal erred in its interpretation of the law.Levy of interest under Section 234D: The Tribunal's decision to uphold the levy of interest under Section 234D was contested by the Appellant. It was argued that the said section should not apply as the assessee denied the liabilities to be levied with interest. However, the Counsel for the parties agreed that the issue raised in this regard was covered in favor of the Revenue and against the Respondent Assessee by a previous decision of the Court. Consequently, Question (e) was not entertained.Conclusion: The High Court admitted the appeal on Questions (a), (b), (c), and (d), indicating that these issues would be further deliberated upon.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
