Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Page of 4788
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
421 to 440 of 95749 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The case involves rectification u/s 154 for disallowance of bad debts provisions u/s 36(1)(viia) in a co-operative bank's computation sheet. ITAT held that the mistake was apparent as the provision was not in the books. CIT(A) noted rectification requires a glaring mistake of law. ITAT found the claim ineligible and rectified u/s 154. CIT(A) noted a similar deduction in a subsequent year but the provision was duly accounted for. AR argued for deduction based on Companies Act provisions, but ITAT found no support for allowing the claim if not in books. Following precedent, ITAT remitted the matter to AO to allow deduction based on actual provision made in books. Revenue's appeal partly allowed for statistical purposes.
The case involves rectification u/s 154 for disallowance of bad debts provisions u/s 36(1)(viia) in a co-operative bank's computation sheet. ITAT held that the mistake was apparent as the provision was not in the books. CIT(A) noted rectification requires a glaring mistake of law. ITAT found the claim ineligible and rectified u/s 154. CIT(A) noted a similar deduction in a subsequent year but the provision was duly accounted for. AR argued for deduction based on Companies Act provisions, but ITAT found no support for allowing the claim if not in books. Following precedent, ITAT remitted the matter to AO to allow deduction based on actual provision made in books. Revenue's appeal partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
