https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291244 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee regarding the disallowance of payment under section 40(a)(i) for usance interest, directing the Assessing Officer to consider the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The inclusion of unutilized Modvat credit in closing stock was upheld with adjustments. Prior period expenses disallowed by the AO were allowed if related to the relevant year. The penalty under section 271(1)(c) was deleted based on debatable issues and full disclosure. The assessee's appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the Revenue's appeals were dismissed. en-us Wed, 28 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Nov 2020 10:08:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291244 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee regarding the disallowance of payment under section 40(a)(i) for usance interest, directing the Assessing Officer to consider the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The inclusion of unutilized Modvat credit in closing stock was upheld with adjustments. Prior period expenses disallowed by the AO were allowed if related to the relevant year. The penalty under section 271(1)(c) was deleted based on debatable issues and full disclosure. The assessee's appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the Revenue's appeals were dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291244