Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
ITAT dismissed appellant's claim for deduction under section 80IA regarding metro tunnel construction contract. The tribunal determined appellant was merely a contractor and LMRCL, being a special purpose vehicle, did not qualify as government/statutory authority required under section 80IA(4). However, ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s decision allowing deduction of legal and professional fees paid to Gulemark TPL JV under section 37. The technical service fees were validated through bank payment records, visa documentation of visiting employees, accommodation agreements, and travel expenses. The expenditure was deemed legitimate business expense since AO had accepted it as revenue expenditure rather than capital expenditure.
ITAT dismissed appellant's claim for deduction under section 80IA regarding metro tunnel construction contract. The tribunal determined appellant was merely a contractor and LMRCL, being a special purpose vehicle, did not qualify as government/statutory authority required under section 80IA(4). However, ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s decision allowing deduction of legal and professional fees paid to Gulemark TPL JV under section 37. The technical service fees were validated through bank payment records, visa documentation of visiting employees, accommodation agreements, and travel expenses. The expenditure was deemed legitimate business expense since AO had accepted it as revenue expenditure rather than capital expenditure.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.