Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
In the case before ITAT Chennai, the issue of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D was considered. The CIT(A) found that no exempt income was earned by the assessee, leading to full relief being granted. The order of the CIT(A) and AO regarding disallowance was set aside, directing the AO to delete the addition from the total income. Regarding TDS u/s 195 for listing charges paid to Bank of New York, it was noted that DTAA provisions were not considered. The AO was directed to re-examine the issue in light of DTAA provisions. The claim of prior period expenditure was dismissed as it cannot be allowed in the assessment of a specific year. The writing off of carbon income was remanded to the AO for re-examination based on past treatment by the Department. The issue was decided in favor of the assessee for statistical purposes only.
In the case before ITAT Chennai, the issue of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D was considered. The CIT(A) found that no exempt income was earned by the assessee, leading to full relief being granted. The order of the CIT(A) and AO regarding disallowance was set aside, directing the AO to delete the addition from the total income. Regarding TDS u/s 195 for listing charges paid to Bank of New York, it was noted that DTAA provisions were not considered. The AO was directed to re-examine the issue in light of DTAA provisions. The claim of prior period expenditure was dismissed as it cannot be allowed in the assessment of a specific year. The writing off of carbon income was remanded to the AO for re-examination based on past treatment by the Department. The issue was decided in favor of the assessee for statistical purposes only.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.