Penalty under section 271(1)(c) deleted where income was disclosed in section 153A returns and remaining additions were only estimated or computationa...
Books of account of a project office cannot be rejected merely because no revenue was shown in the year and only expenditure was claimed; absent cogent material, such rejection is unsustainable, and the appellate deletion of its consequences was upheld. Additions made by treating a foreign exchange item as fees for technical services and by treating head office remittances as undisclosed income also failed because they were unsupported by substance or material evidence. The ITAT agreed with the Commissioner (Appeals) that the assessee's project-office receipts and remittances did not justify the impugned additions, and it dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
Books of account of a project office cannot be rejected merely because no revenue was shown in the year and only expenditure was claimed; absent cogent material, such rejection is unsustainable, and the appellate deletion of its consequences was upheld. Additions made by treating a foreign exchange item as fees for technical services and by treating head office remittances as undisclosed income also failed because they were unsupported by substance or material evidence. The ITAT agreed with the Commissioner (Appeals) that the assessee's project-office receipts and remittances did not justify the impugned additions, and it dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
