Depreciation and routine compliance expenses disallowance did not prove inaccurate particulars or misreporting; penalty sustained only on foreign trav...
Deduction under section 35(1)(ii) was denied because the recipient trust lacked valid recognition beyond 31.03.2006 and post 2006 certificates/receipts were treated as forged or invalid; ITAT upheld disallowance, endorsing the Commissioner(Appeals) reliance on CBDT instructions and precedent. Separately, weighted deductions under section 80 IA for an effluent treatment plant and steam generation were refused for failure to furnish the statutory audit report/Form 10CCB within the prescribed period; ITAT applied the principle of strict/substantial compliance of fiscal formalities and held the conditions precedent unmet, so deductions could not be allowed. Appeals dismissed on both grounds.
Deduction under section 35(1)(ii) was denied because the recipient trust lacked valid recognition beyond 31.03.2006 and post 2006 certificates/receipts were treated as forged or invalid; ITAT upheld disallowance, endorsing the Commissioner(Appeals) reliance on CBDT instructions and precedent. Separately, weighted deductions under section 80 IA for an effluent treatment plant and steam generation were refused for failure to furnish the statutory audit report/Form 10CCB within the prescribed period; ITAT applied the principle of strict/substantial compliance of fiscal formalities and held the conditions precedent unmet, so deductions could not be allowed. Appeals dismissed on both grounds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
