Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Disallowance of contingency expenses claimed by the assessee. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the contingency expenses despite acknowledging that the total cost figure in the Cost to Completion (CTC) report matched the total cost figure in the books of accounts. The Tribunal held that the contingency expenditure, though initially budgeted, is eventually recorded in the books of accounts as actual expenditure. The Tribunal observed that the AO himself admitted that the total cost figure in the CTC report matched the total cost figure in the books of accounts. Since the contingency figures were recorded against the total expenditure, it is illogical to assume that the assessee booked bogus expenditure and generated cash outflow. The Tribunal emphasized that in survey operations, the onus is on the revenue authorities to provide cogent evidence that the assessee incurred expenses not recorded in the books of accounts. As the impugned expenditure was found recorded in the regular books of accounts, the allegation of non-compliance with Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is irrelevant. The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the additions from the captioned appeals.
Disallowance of contingency expenses claimed by the assessee. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the contingency expenses despite acknowledging that the total cost figure in the Cost to Completion (CTC) report matched the total cost figure in the books of accounts. The Tribunal held that the contingency expenditure, though initially budgeted, is eventually recorded in the books of accounts as actual expenditure. The Tribunal observed that the AO himself admitted that the total cost figure in the CTC report matched the total cost figure in the books of accounts. Since the contingency figures were recorded against the total expenditure, it is illogical to assume that the assessee booked bogus expenditure and generated cash outflow. The Tribunal emphasized that in survey operations, the onus is on the revenue authorities to provide cogent evidence that the assessee incurred expenses not recorded in the books of accounts. As the impugned expenditure was found recorded in the regular books of accounts, the allegation of non-compliance with Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is irrelevant. The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the additions from the captioned appeals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
