https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777498 ITAT (Delhi - AT) upheld the appellate order allowing most of the assessee's claims. The Tribunal held AO erred in saying CIT(A) should apply presumptive 44AD after rejecting books, noting AO himself made specific additions/disallowances which CIT(A) examined and adjudicated. Deductions under sections 80HH/80I were allowed on documentary proof; disallowances of manufacturing, administrative, selling and interest expenses were largely deleted or limited where AO's findings lacked specific evidence. Depreciation on kegs at 100% was upheld, and additions for unexplained plant & machinery were deleted. Revenue grounds were dismissed on merits. en-us Wed, 27 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Aug 2025 08:31:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777498 ITAT (Delhi - AT) upheld the appellate order allowing most of the assessee's claims. The Tribunal held AO erred in saying CIT(A) should apply presumptive 44AD after rejecting books, noting AO himself made specific additions/disallowances which CIT(A) examined and adjudicated. Deductions under sections 80HH/80I were allowed on documentary proof; disallowances of manufacturing, administrative, selling and interest expenses were largely deleted or limited where AO's findings lacked specific evidence. Depreciation on kegs at 100% was upheld, and additions for unexplained plant & machinery were deleted. Revenue grounds were dismissed on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777498