Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
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 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
