Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
ITAT held that the assessee had actually declared dividend of Rs. 22.67 crores and paid DDT of Rs. 4.61 crores thereon, and that the higher figure of Rs. 27.26 crores in the ROI was an inadvertent inclusion of DDT in the dividend figure. ITAT noted that the assessee had substantiated this with financial statements before CPC and the AO, and that the AO's reliance solely on the ROI figure was unjustified. The addition made towards excess DDT liability was therefore held to be unsustainable and directed to be deleted. On depreciation for assets acquired pursuant to demerger from a state entity, ITAT followed its earlier years' decisions and upheld the assessee's depreciation claim, allowing the appeal.
ITAT held that the assessee had actually declared dividend of Rs. 22.67 crores and paid DDT of Rs. 4.61 crores thereon, and that the higher figure of Rs. 27.26 crores in the ROI was an inadvertent inclusion of DDT in the dividend figure. ITAT noted that the assessee had substantiated this with financial statements before CPC and the AO, and that the AO's reliance solely on the ROI figure was unjustified. The addition made towards excess DDT liability was therefore held to be unsustainable and directed to be deleted. On depreciation for assets acquired pursuant to demerger from a state entity, ITAT followed its earlier years' decisions and upheld the assessee's depreciation claim, allowing the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
