<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (10) TMI 1192 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444969</link>
    <description>The ITAT Visakhapatnam dismissed the assessee&#039;s appeal. The tribunal upheld additions made by the AO regarding unsubstantiated labour and material creditor payments, finding the assessee failed to provide adequate evidence despite multiple opportunities. The assessee produced confirmation letters from only 8 out of 17 labour groups, which were deemed insufficient. The tribunal rejected the assessee&#039;s request to estimate income by rejecting books of accounts, noting the company was subject to mandatory audit under Companies Act and section 44AB. Additionally, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was sustained as the assessee failed to deduct tax at source on various payments as required.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Oct 2023 20:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=730346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 1192 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444969</link>
      <description>The ITAT Visakhapatnam dismissed the assessee&#039;s appeal. The tribunal upheld additions made by the AO regarding unsubstantiated labour and material creditor payments, finding the assessee failed to provide adequate evidence despite multiple opportunities. The assessee produced confirmation letters from only 8 out of 17 labour groups, which were deemed insufficient. The tribunal rejected the assessee&#039;s request to estimate income by rejecting books of accounts, noting the company was subject to mandatory audit under Companies Act and section 44AB. Additionally, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was sustained as the assessee failed to deduct tax at source on various payments as required.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444969</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>