Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
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 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
