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...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2741 to 2760 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Assessee followed system of regularly showing mobilization account and advances received, offering income against bills in subsequent years. Revenue did not previously object to this treatment. CIT(Appeals) and Tribunal deleted additions made by Assessing Officer on account of "Mobilization Advance" for the year. Statements of Samiti members showed lack of full knowledge on work progress, with Sub Divisional Engineer overseeing the matter. Work completion certificates indicated work was completed later and income offered for taxation in subsequent years. Non-commensurate work-in-progress amount of Rs. 69,31,666 did not justify treating advances as income. Assessing Officer added Rs. 2,00,95,900 as unaccounted receipts from Samiti, failing to note it was already shown as liability in books. No instance to interfere with CIT(Appeals) observations. CIT(Appeals) order upholding dismissal of Revenue's grounds was affirmed.
Assessee followed system of regularly showing mobilization account and advances received, offering income against bills in subsequent years. Revenue did not previously object to this treatment. CIT(Appeals) and Tribunal deleted additions made by Assessing Officer on account of "Mobilization Advance" for the year. Statements of Samiti members showed lack of full knowledge on work progress, with Sub Divisional Engineer overseeing the matter. Work completion certificates indicated work was completed later and income offered for taxation in subsequent years. Non-commensurate work-in-progress amount of Rs. 69,31,666 did not justify treating advances as income. Assessing Officer added Rs. 2,00,95,900 as unaccounted receipts from Samiti, failing to note it was already shown as liability in books. No instance to interfere with CIT(Appeals) observations. CIT(Appeals) order upholding dismissal of Revenue's grounds was affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
