https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456057 The ITAT Mumbai ruled on multiple issues for the assessee. The tribunal deleted additions for unverified commission expenses, finding the assessee successfully rebutted the presumption from statements under section 132(4) by providing supporting evidence. For bogus purchases, the matter was remanded to the AO for fresh examination after VAT authorities accepted revised returns. Prior period expenses were disallowed as they should have been provided for under mercantile accounting. The tribunal directed 15% disallowance of exempt income under section 14A instead of applying Rule 8D. For MAT computation, provision for bad debts was held not to be added to book profit. Several other issues including section 10B deduction, mark-to-market losses, section 35(2AB) deduction, and ESOP expenses were remanded to the AO for factual verification and proper examination. en-us Fri, 03 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Jun 2024 20:51:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456057 The ITAT Mumbai ruled on multiple issues for the assessee. The tribunal deleted additions for unverified commission expenses, finding the assessee successfully rebutted the presumption from statements under section 132(4) by providing supporting evidence. For bogus purchases, the matter was remanded to the AO for fresh examination after VAT authorities accepted revised returns. Prior period expenses were disallowed as they should have been provided for under mercantile accounting. The tribunal directed 15% disallowance of exempt income under section 14A instead of applying Rule 8D. For MAT computation, provision for bad debts was held not to be added to book profit. Several other issues including section 10B deduction, mark-to-market losses, section 35(2AB) deduction, and ESOP expenses were remanded to the AO for factual verification and proper examination. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 03 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456057