https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457873 Delhi HC dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding ITAT's decision to delete multiple additions made by AO. The court confirmed that AO lacked jurisdiction to go beyond net profit in P&L account under Section 115JB, except as provided in the Explanation. ITAT correctly deleted additions for foreign exchange fluctuations, Section 14A and 36(1)(iii) disallowances, transfer pricing adjustments on AE loans, cash payments under Section 40A(3), and interest on delayed indirect tax payments. The court also held that transactions pertained to AY 2011-12 based on the appointed date, not 2012-13 as claimed. Additions under Sections 28(iv) and 56(2)(viia) were deleted as the scheme qualified for exemption under Section 47(vii). No substantial questions of law were raised. en-us Fri, 19 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 29 Sep 2024 16:20:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457873 Delhi HC dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding ITAT's decision to delete multiple additions made by AO. The court confirmed that AO lacked jurisdiction to go beyond net profit in P&L account under Section 115JB, except as provided in the Explanation. ITAT correctly deleted additions for foreign exchange fluctuations, Section 14A and 36(1)(iii) disallowances, transfer pricing adjustments on AE loans, cash payments under Section 40A(3), and interest on delayed indirect tax payments. The court also held that transactions pertained to AY 2011-12 based on the appointed date, not 2012-13 as claimed. Additions under Sections 28(iv) and 56(2)(viia) were deleted as the scheme qualified for exemption under Section 47(vii). No substantial questions of law were raised. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 19 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457873