https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778306 The HC allowed the writ under Article 226, holding that the AO wrongly added expenses of Rs.103.15 crores to the petitioner's income despite those expenses not being claimed as deductions. The court found the AO's reliance on accounting treatment misplaced and that entitlement to deduction depends on the statute, not books of account. The HC rejected the Revenue's plea for remand as the addition was a conscious order, not an oversight, and quashed and set aside the assessment order for AY 2022-23 together with the consequential demand notice under s.156 and the penalty show-cause notice under s.274. en-us Tue, 09 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Sep 2025 08:47:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778306 The HC allowed the writ under Article 226, holding that the AO wrongly added expenses of Rs.103.15 crores to the petitioner's income despite those expenses not being claimed as deductions. The court found the AO's reliance on accounting treatment misplaced and that entitlement to deduction depends on the statute, not books of account. The HC rejected the Revenue's plea for remand as the addition was a conscious order, not an oversight, and quashed and set aside the assessment order for AY 2022-23 together with the consequential demand notice under s.156 and the penalty show-cause notice under s.274. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778306