Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1201 to 1220 of 96046 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
