Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
In the ITAT Delhi case, the Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on two key issues. Firstly, regarding unexplained cash deposits u/s 68, the AO's failure to consider cash balances and debtor realizations led to the addition being deemed unsustainable. The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the addition. Secondly, on the disallowance of interest paid u/s 36(1)(iii), the Tribunal accepted the assessee's argument that interest on bank loans is a business expenditure, given the assessee's history of real estate and finance business activities. The disallowance made by the AO was deleted based on the Tribunal's decision for the assessment year 2009-10, affirming the assessee's real estate business activities.
In the ITAT Delhi case, the Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on two key issues. Firstly, regarding unexplained cash deposits u/s 68, the AO's failure to consider cash balances and debtor realizations led to the addition being deemed unsustainable. The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the addition. Secondly, on the disallowance of interest paid u/s 36(1)(iii), the Tribunal accepted the assessee's argument that interest on bank loans is a business expenditure, given the assessee's history of real estate and finance business activities. The disallowance made by the AO was deleted based on the Tribunal's decision for the assessment year 2009-10, affirming the assessee's real estate business activities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
