Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The ITAT held that the time limit for filing Form 67 under Rule 128(9) is directory; where the taxpayer filed Form 67 during the pendency of the appeal before the CIT(A), the foreign tax credit should have been allowed. The matter is remitted to the AO to verify the claim and, if found in order, grant the foreign tax credit after due compliance. On carry-forward, the ITAT held that unabsorbed depreciation does not constitute a "business loss" for the relevant AY; the AO is directed to allow carry-forward losses for the earlier year in accordance with law after affording the assessee an opportunity of hearing. Ground No.3 allowed.
The ITAT held that the time limit for filing Form 67 under Rule 128(9) is directory; where the taxpayer filed Form 67 during the pendency of the appeal before the CIT(A), the foreign tax credit should have been allowed. The matter is remitted to the AO to verify the claim and, if found in order, grant the foreign tax credit after due compliance. On carry-forward, the ITAT held that unabsorbed depreciation does not constitute a "business loss" for the relevant AY; the AO is directed to allow carry-forward losses for the earlier year in accordance with law after affording the assessee an opportunity of hearing. Ground No.3 allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
