https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444551 The ITAT Kolkata ruled in favor of the assessee on two key issues. First, the AO lacked jurisdiction to add delayed provident fund payments during limited scrutiny as this item was not within the scope of limited scrutiny. The AO failed to obtain prior approval to convert limited scrutiny into complete scrutiny before making the addition. Second, the AO improperly invoked Rule 8D without recording mandatory satisfaction under Section 14A regarding disallowance of expenditure related to exempt income. Both additions were directed to be deleted, and the assessee's appeal was allowed. en-us Thu, 12 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Jul 2025 17:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444551 The ITAT Kolkata ruled in favor of the assessee on two key issues. First, the AO lacked jurisdiction to add delayed provident fund payments during limited scrutiny as this item was not within the scope of limited scrutiny. The AO failed to obtain prior approval to convert limited scrutiny into complete scrutiny before making the addition. Second, the AO improperly invoked Rule 8D without recording mandatory satisfaction under Section 14A regarding disallowance of expenditure related to exempt income. Both additions were directed to be deleted, and the assessee's appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 12 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444551