https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773020 ITAT PUNE held that CPC's adjustment under section 143(1)(a) computing tax at 30% instead of 25% was unjustified. The assessee argued turnover was below Rs. 250 crore threshold. ITAT found the determination of gross turnover including service tax input credit, interest on refunds, and bad debt recovery was highly debatable. CPC failed to provide hearing opportunity, violating section 143(1) first proviso. Following Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. precedent, ITAT ruled debatable claims cannot be disallowed via section 143(1)(a) intimation without hearing. Assessee's appeal allowed. en-us Thu, 12 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jun 2025 07:57:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773020 ITAT PUNE held that CPC's adjustment under section 143(1)(a) computing tax at 30% instead of 25% was unjustified. The assessee argued turnover was below Rs. 250 crore threshold. ITAT found the determination of gross turnover including service tax input credit, interest on refunds, and bad debt recovery was highly debatable. CPC failed to provide hearing opportunity, violating section 143(1) first proviso. Following Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. precedent, ITAT ruled debatable claims cannot be disallowed via section 143(1)(a) intimation without hearing. Assessee's appeal allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 12 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773020