Restriction of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A applies only to fraudulently or ineligible availed credit; mere wrongful recipient availment is insuffi...
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.