https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184227 ITAT Mumbai applied binding precedent to hold that the section 41(1) addition arising from the difference between sales tax loan liability and actual payment was unsustainable, so the addition was deleted. For section 80HHC, sales of services had to be reworked in line with Supreme Court computation guidelines, so that part was remitted, while DEPB sale proceeds were governed by Kalpataru Colours and Chemicals and the assessee's plea was rejected. The Tribunal also held that section 80IB deduction was not to be reduced while computing section 80HHC, allowing full relief on that point. Deduction under section 80M on dividend distribution was also held admissible, and relief was directed accordingly. en-us Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Sep 2017 10:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184227 ITAT Mumbai applied binding precedent to hold that the section 41(1) addition arising from the difference between sales tax loan liability and actual payment was unsustainable, so the addition was deleted. For section 80HHC, sales of services had to be reworked in line with Supreme Court computation guidelines, so that part was remitted, while DEPB sale proceeds were governed by Kalpataru Colours and Chemicals and the assessee's plea was rejected. The Tribunal also held that section 80IB deduction was not to be reduced while computing section 80HHC, allowing full relief on that point. Deduction under section 80M on dividend distribution was also held admissible, and relief was directed accordingly. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184227