https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180414 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing the Assessing Officer to reassess subcontract expenses and closing work-in-progress valuation based on specific guidelines. The Tribunal emphasized the burden of proof on the assessee regarding expenses' genuineness, highlighting the AO's failure to conclusively disprove payments. It instructed the AO to exclude TDS-covered payments and confirmation letters, disallowing 15% of unverified payments. Consistency in valuation methods for work-in-progress was stressed for uniform assessment practices. en-us Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Mar 2016 12:12:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180414 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing the Assessing Officer to reassess subcontract expenses and closing work-in-progress valuation based on specific guidelines. The Tribunal emphasized the burden of proof on the assessee regarding expenses' genuineness, highlighting the AO's failure to conclusively disprove payments. It instructed the AO to exclude TDS-covered payments and confirmation letters, disallowing 15% of unverified payments. Consistency in valuation methods for work-in-progress was stressed for uniform assessment practices. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180414