Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision disallowing the expenditure incurred on a study for optimizing freight costs, which was initially accounted as a provision for capital work in progress and later written off as other expenditure following project abandonment. The tribunal agreed that such expenditure does not qualify as capital expenditure or an unascertained liability. It was clarified that the assessee added back the amount in the computation of book profit under Section 115JB as a diminution in value of investments, consistent with the statutory explanation, and not as an unascertained liability. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the disallowance and the treatment of the expenditure in the assessee's financials.
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision disallowing the expenditure incurred on a study for optimizing freight costs, which was initially accounted as a provision for capital work in progress and later written off as other expenditure following project abandonment. The tribunal agreed that such expenditure does not qualify as capital expenditure or an unascertained liability. It was clarified that the assessee added back the amount in the computation of book profit under Section 115JB as a diminution in value of investments, consistent with the statutory explanation, and not as an unascertained liability. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the disallowance and the treatment of the expenditure in the assessee's financials.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.