Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision allowing the assessee's claim for interest expenditure under section 57(iii), applying the rule of consistency. The AO's full disallowance of interest was found unjustified, particularly given the partial disallowance in AY 2011-12 for similar facts. The assessee demonstrated that funds were mixed but primarily used for income-generating activities, consistent with prior years' assessments. The tribunal accepted the assessee's calculation of proportionate disallowance amounting to Rs. 43.45 lakhs, reflecting fresh borrowings, while recognizing that the majority of borrowings related to earlier years. No material change in facts was established, and the AO's deviation from prior practice lacked justification. The appeal was allowed, confirming the CIT(A)'s order in favor of the assessee.
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision allowing the assessee's claim for interest expenditure under section 57(iii), applying the rule of consistency. The AO's full disallowance of interest was found unjustified, particularly given the partial disallowance in AY 2011-12 for similar facts. The assessee demonstrated that funds were mixed but primarily used for income-generating activities, consistent with prior years' assessments. The tribunal accepted the assessee's calculation of proportionate disallowance amounting to Rs. 43.45 lakhs, reflecting fresh borrowings, while recognizing that the majority of borrowings related to earlier years. No material change in facts was established, and the AO's deviation from prior practice lacked justification. The appeal was allowed, confirming the CIT(A)'s order in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.