Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
Employee conflict disclosures and investment restrictions expand with new recusal duties, post-employment limits, and compliance reporting requirement...
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 
