https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214316 Material errors in allocating common expenses to the eligible undertaking justified rejection of the books under section 145(3) because the accounts were not sufficiently correct or reliable. After that rejection, the STP unit profit estimate for section 10A required fresh factual examination, as the basis for treating reimbursements and applying the uplift was inadequately explained. An actuarial provision for leave encashment was allowed as an ascertained business liability that had arisen during the year. Interest under section 234D could not be levied for assessment years prior to 2004-05, since the provision applies prospectively only. en-us Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Apr 2016 15:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214316 Material errors in allocating common expenses to the eligible undertaking justified rejection of the books under section 145(3) because the accounts were not sufficiently correct or reliable. After that rejection, the STP unit profit estimate for section 10A required fresh factual examination, as the basis for treating reimbursements and applying the uplift was inadequately explained. An actuarial provision for leave encashment was allowed as an ascertained business liability that had arisen during the year. Interest under section 234D could not be levied for assessment years prior to 2004-05, since the provision applies prospectively only. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214316