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...
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s reduction of disallowance on work-in-progress (WIP) expenses to 10%, finding the revenue's arbitrary adoption of this percentage without objective data impermissible, thereby allowing the assessee's ground and dismissing the revenue's claim. Regarding interest paid to a partner on capital introduced, the tribunal found the assessee's claim substantiated with adequate documentation and no evidence provided by the AO to prove the interest rate was excessive or unreasonable. The interest paid at 10.7% was deemed a legitimate financial cost integral to the project's sustenance. Consequently, the addition made by the AO was set aside, and the revenue's ground was rejected. Thus, both appeals by the revenue were dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s orders in favor of the assessee.
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s reduction of disallowance on work-in-progress (WIP) expenses to 10%, finding the revenue's arbitrary adoption of this percentage without objective data impermissible, thereby allowing the assessee's ground and dismissing the revenue's claim. Regarding interest paid to a partner on capital introduced, the tribunal found the assessee's claim substantiated with adequate documentation and no evidence provided by the AO to prove the interest rate was excessive or unreasonable. The interest paid at 10.7% was deemed a legitimate financial cost integral to the project's sustenance. Consequently, the addition made by the AO was set aside, and the revenue's ground was rejected. Thus, both appeals by the revenue were dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s orders in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
