Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
ITAT allowed the appeal: it reversed the AO's additions and directed deletion of the disallowance under s.69C. The Tribunal found the AO and CIT(A) erred in rejecting bona fide improvement expenditures where the assessee produced original bills, payment evidence and corroborative invoices, despite the assessee's name not appearing on some vouchers; the totality of circumstances supported allowance of the cost of improvement. Likewise, commission/brokerage payments to four payees were held to be genuine and claimed in the recipients' returns and confirmations; mere filing after s.133(6) inquiries or familial relationship did not justify disallowance absent contrary evidence. The AO was directed to allow the claimed deductions for computation of capital gains.
ITAT allowed the appeal: it reversed the AO's additions and directed deletion of the disallowance under s.69C. The Tribunal found the AO and CIT(A) erred in rejecting bona fide improvement expenditures where the assessee produced original bills, payment evidence and corroborative invoices, despite the assessee's name not appearing on some vouchers; the totality of circumstances supported allowance of the cost of improvement. Likewise, commission/brokerage payments to four payees were held to be genuine and claimed in the recipients' returns and confirmations; mere filing after s.133(6) inquiries or familial relationship did not justify disallowance absent contrary evidence. The AO was directed to allow the claimed deductions for computation of capital gains.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
