Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Undisclosed receipts were added to gross profit by the AO, but the assessee claimed corresponding expenditure. CIT(A) deleted the addition, terming it double assessment. The department did not rebut that the addition was double assessment or deny the corresponding expenditure. ITAT held that the AO could not brush aside the assessee's claim of corresponding expenditure, which was duly considered by CIT(A). The department's grounds did not dispute the correctness of the expenditure items. The addition was rejected accordingly.
Undisclosed receipts were added to gross profit by the AO, but the assessee claimed corresponding expenditure. CIT(A) deleted the addition, terming it double assessment. The department did not rebut that the addition was double assessment or deny the corresponding expenditure. ITAT held that the AO could not brush aside the assessee's claim of corresponding expenditure, which was duly considered by CIT(A). The department's grounds did not dispute the correctness of the expenditure items. The addition was rejected accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.