https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291466 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision and dismissed the Revenue's appeals for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14. The Tribunal determined that the payment of rate difference after the accounting year closure did not constitute profit distribution, citing precedent. Additionally, the Tribunal found the payment justified for commercial expediency and upheld the deletion of an addition for depreciation on fixed assets. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's plea to restore the Assessing Officer's order, affirming the decisions based on legal principles and past court rulings. en-us Thu, 30 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Jul 2021 12:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291466 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision and dismissed the Revenue's appeals for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14. The Tribunal determined that the payment of rate difference after the accounting year closure did not constitute profit distribution, citing precedent. Additionally, the Tribunal found the payment justified for commercial expediency and upheld the deletion of an addition for depreciation on fixed assets. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's plea to restore the Assessing Officer's order, affirming the decisions based on legal principles and past court rulings. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 30 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291466