https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463111 Prior period expenses and the section 14A disallowance were restored for verification and reconsideration, with the Tribunal treating crystallisation, double deduction, and satisfaction-based quantification as factual matters requiring fresh examination. Interest derecognition on NPAs was rejected because the issue had already been decided against the assessee by the High Court and the Special Leave Petition was dismissed. Income withdrawn in a revised return was accepted for the subsequent assessment year because the bond income had ultimately been offered to tax then. The claim for incremental special reserve under sections 36(1)(viia)(c) and 36(1)(viii) was treated as consequential and restored for recomputation based on the finally determined income. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Aug 2025 15:04:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463111 Prior period expenses and the section 14A disallowance were restored for verification and reconsideration, with the Tribunal treating crystallisation, double deduction, and satisfaction-based quantification as factual matters requiring fresh examination. Interest derecognition on NPAs was rejected because the issue had already been decided against the assessee by the High Court and the Special Leave Petition was dismissed. Income withdrawn in a revised return was accepted for the subsequent assessment year because the bond income had ultimately been offered to tax then. The claim for incremental special reserve under sections 36(1)(viia)(c) and 36(1)(viii) was treated as consequential and restored for recomputation based on the finally determined income. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463111