https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273330 The appeal against the CIT(A) order was partially allowed by the ITAT. The ITAT directed the AO to reexamine the inclusion of expenditure in work-in-progress (WIP) and the treatment of software expenses as capital in nature. It was found that the expenses were related to multiple projects in the pipeline, particularly the development of an industrial park property. Additionally, the treatment of interest income as income from other sources was also to be reevaluated, considering the netting of interest paid and earned and its potential relation to the WIP. en-us Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:48:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273330 The appeal against the CIT(A) order was partially allowed by the ITAT. The ITAT directed the AO to reexamine the inclusion of expenditure in work-in-progress (WIP) and the treatment of software expenses as capital in nature. It was found that the expenses were related to multiple projects in the pipeline, particularly the development of an industrial park property. Additionally, the treatment of interest income as income from other sources was also to be reevaluated, considering the netting of interest paid and earned and its potential relation to the WIP. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273330