https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776405 The ITAT Chennai upheld the CIT(A)'s decision disallowing the AO's rejection of expenditure incurred on a study for optimizing freight costs, which was initially treated as a provision for capital work in progress and later written off after project abandonment. The tribunal agreed that such expenditure is neither capital expenditure nor an unascertained liability. The assessee had added back the amount in book profit computation under Section 115JB as a diminution in investment value, not as an unascertained liability. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed. en-us Wed, 02 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Aug 2025 09:32:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776405 The ITAT Chennai upheld the CIT(A)'s decision disallowing the AO's rejection of expenditure incurred on a study for optimizing freight costs, which was initially treated as a provision for capital work in progress and later written off after project abandonment. The tribunal agreed that such expenditure is neither capital expenditure nor an unascertained liability. The assessee had added back the amount in book profit computation under Section 115JB as a diminution in investment value, not as an unascertained liability. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 02 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776405