Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
Annual letting value (ALV) of unsold residential units treated as stock-in-trade was added as income from house property. CIT(A) deleted the addition. High Court affirmed ALV addition in assessee's own case for earlier years. Supreme Court upheld High Court's view. CIT(A)'s deletion cannot be sustained. Issue of taxability of vacant lands restored to AO for verification. Regarding allocation of expenses for computing deduction u/s 80IB(10), CIT(A) rightly allocated advertisement expenses based on average of earlier years and allocated directors' meeting fees as no evidence showed no agenda related to eligible projects. CIT(A) correctly did not allocate interest on borrowed funds as projects were running in surplus. Setting off of losses against profits correctly allowed as losses already set off earlier cannot be notionally brought forward. Disallowance u/s 14A rightly deleted as no evidence of investments from borrowed funds or expenditure for earning exempt income. Allocation of retainership fees upheld in absence of evidence of non-rendering of services for eligible projects.
Annual letting value (ALV) of unsold residential units treated as stock-in-trade was added as income from house property. CIT(A) deleted the addition. High Court affirmed ALV addition in assessee's own case for earlier years. Supreme Court upheld High Court's view. CIT(A)'s deletion cannot be sustained. Issue of taxability of vacant lands restored to AO for verification. Regarding allocation of expenses for computing deduction u/s 80IB(10), CIT(A) rightly allocated advertisement expenses based on average of earlier years and allocated directors' meeting fees as no evidence showed no agenda related to eligible projects. CIT(A) correctly did not allocate interest on borrowed funds as projects were running in surplus. Setting off of losses against profits correctly allowed as losses already set off earlier cannot be notionally brought forward. Disallowance u/s 14A rightly deleted as no evidence of investments from borrowed funds or expenditure for earning exempt income. Allocation of retainership fees upheld in absence of evidence of non-rendering of services for eligible projects.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
