https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766492 ITAT Chennai allowed the assessee's appeal regarding two issues. First, the tribunal held that AO and CIT(A) erred in adding back a provision that was created in AY 2016-17 and released in AY 2017-18, since the provision was not claimed as expenditure initially. Second, the tribunal set aside the 5% adhoc disallowance of various expenses, finding no cogent reason for the disallowance when the assessee provided complete ledger extracts, vouchers, and audited books of accounts to statutory authorities. en-us Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Feb 2025 08:17:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766492 ITAT Chennai allowed the assessee's appeal regarding two issues. First, the tribunal held that AO and CIT(A) erred in adding back a provision that was created in AY 2016-17 and released in AY 2017-18, since the provision was not claimed as expenditure initially. Second, the tribunal set aside the 5% adhoc disallowance of various expenses, finding no cogent reason for the disallowance when the assessee provided complete ledger extracts, vouchers, and audited books of accounts to statutory authorities. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766492