https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770158 ITAT Hyderabad allowed the appeal partially. The tribunal admitted additional evidence under Rule 29 regarding outstanding liability with IOC Limited, accepting the confirmation letter and ledger account as justifiable evidence despite late filing due to IOC's SAP software migration. The addition made by AO and sustained by CIT(A) was vacated as IOC confirmed the outstanding amount. However, the tribunal dismissed the ground regarding sub-contract payments, upholding the disallowance as the assessee failed to provide evidence proving payments were for actual sub-contract work rather than advances. en-us Fri, 21 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 May 2025 09:18:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770158 ITAT Hyderabad allowed the appeal partially. The tribunal admitted additional evidence under Rule 29 regarding outstanding liability with IOC Limited, accepting the confirmation letter and ledger account as justifiable evidence despite late filing due to IOC's SAP software migration. The addition made by AO and sustained by CIT(A) was vacated as IOC confirmed the outstanding amount. However, the tribunal dismissed the ground regarding sub-contract payments, upholding the disallowance as the assessee failed to provide evidence proving payments were for actual sub-contract work rather than advances. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 21 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770158