Writ relief against show cause notices is available where jurisdiction is absent and concluded advance rulings cannot be reopened without fresh fraud ...
The ITAT addressed multiple revenue and business expense issues, holding that advances from customers already accounted for under sale agreements or the Percentage of Completion Method could not be added again, and that notional interest on business advances or imprest could not be taxed as hypothetical income. It sustained deletion of disallowances where invoices, payment evidence, or business nexus were verified, but upheld a disallowance for advertisement expense found unrelated to business. It also held that section 14A disallowance could not survive in the absence of exempt income, and accepted prior period expenses where liability had crystallized. Certain issues on revised computation, advertisement, consultancy and withholding tax were remanded for verification, while employee accommodation commission and brokerage and write-off of advances were allowed as deductible business loss.
The ITAT addressed multiple revenue and business expense issues, holding that advances from customers already accounted for under sale agreements or the Percentage of Completion Method could not be added again, and that notional interest on business advances or imprest could not be taxed as hypothetical income. It sustained deletion of disallowances where invoices, payment evidence, or business nexus were verified, but upheld a disallowance for advertisement expense found unrelated to business. It also held that section 14A disallowance could not survive in the absence of exempt income, and accepted prior period expenses where liability had crystallized. Certain issues on revised computation, advertisement, consultancy and withholding tax were remanded for verification, while employee accommodation commission and brokerage and write-off of advances were allowed as deductible business loss.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.