https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86143 ITAT held that ABET does not qualify as a "specified person" under section 13(3), invalidating the AO's disallowance of interest expenditure and lease rent under section 13(2). The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s order on these matters, dismissing Revenue's grounds 1-4. Regarding standard deduction under section 24, ITAT directed AO to disallow the 30% deduction claimed on house property income, reversing CIT(A)'s findings. On the issue of hybrid accounting for interest income, ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, confirming that following cash system for Income from Other Sources was consistent with section 145 requirements. The Tribunal referenced precedents from Madras HC and Calcutta HC supporting income computation from trust property in normal commercial manner without section 14 provisions. en-us Sat, 01 Mar 2025 08:25:45 +0530 Sat, 01 Mar 2025 08:25:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86143 ITAT held that ABET does not qualify as a "specified person" under section 13(3), invalidating the AO's disallowance of interest expenditure and lease rent under section 13(2). The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s order on these matters, dismissing Revenue's grounds 1-4. Regarding standard deduction under section 24, ITAT directed AO to disallow the 30% deduction claimed on house property income, reversing CIT(A)'s findings. On the issue of hybrid accounting for interest income, ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, confirming that following cash system for Income from Other Sources was consistent with section 145 requirements. The Tribunal referenced precedents from Madras HC and Calcutta HC supporting income computation from trust property in normal commercial manner without section 14 provisions. Highlights Income Tax Sat, 01 Mar 2025 08:25:45 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86143