<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Appeal allowed: s.11 accumulated funds found previously spent; AO&#039;s Goetze-based disallowance set aside for punching error</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92277</link>
    <description>ITAT allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s grounds. The Tribunal held that accumulated funds under s.11 were expended in prior assessment years and no accumulated balance remained for application in the year under assessment; the inadvertent inclusion in Schedule I of the ITR for AY 2018-19 resulted from a &quot;punching error.&quot; The AO&#039;s disallowance, premised on Goetze-based treatment, was rejected because the assessee neither claimed a deduction in the return nor during assessment proceedings based on prior accumulated funds. Consequently, the addition for alleged non-utilisation of accumulated funds was set aside and the Revenue&#039;s challenge was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2025 08:16:25 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2025 08:16:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=848563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appeal allowed: s.11 accumulated funds found previously spent; AO&#039;s Goetze-based disallowance set aside for punching error</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92277</link>
      <description>ITAT allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s grounds. The Tribunal held that accumulated funds under s.11 were expended in prior assessment years and no accumulated balance remained for application in the year under assessment; the inadvertent inclusion in Schedule I of the ITR for AY 2018-19 resulted from a &quot;punching error.&quot; The AO&#039;s disallowance, premised on Goetze-based treatment, was rejected because the assessee neither claimed a deduction in the return nor during assessment proceedings based on prior accumulated funds. Consequently, the addition for alleged non-utilisation of accumulated funds was set aside and the Revenue&#039;s challenge was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2025 08:16:25 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92277</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>