https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780429 ITAT held that transport expenses claimed by the assessee were genuine and that the AO's adhoc disallowance (88%) could not be sustained merely because certain vehicles did not appear on the VAHAN portal. The tribunal found the CIT(A) erred in applying s.40(a)(ia) and rejected estimation without invoking s.145(3). It directed the AO to allow most expenses and make a restricted addition of 2% of lorry expenses (Rs. 11,01,641), deleting the remaining disallowance of Rs. 4,64,90,566; the appeal was partly allowed. en-us Mon, 27 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Oct 2025 08:22:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780429 ITAT held that transport expenses claimed by the assessee were genuine and that the AO's adhoc disallowance (88%) could not be sustained merely because certain vehicles did not appear on the VAHAN portal. The tribunal found the CIT(A) erred in applying s.40(a)(ia) and rejected estimation without invoking s.145(3). It directed the AO to allow most expenses and make a restricted addition of 2% of lorry expenses (Rs. 11,01,641), deleting the remaining disallowance of Rs. 4,64,90,566; the appeal was partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 27 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780429