https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465547 Additions for alleged bogus expenditure were untenable where the corresponding inflated sales from the same transactions had already been offered to tax and taxes were collected, and a higher amount from the same transaction for the same AY stood taxed in another taxpayer's hands without further challenge; applying the principle against double taxation and the ratio that no disallowance is warranted when the recipient has disclosed the receipt, the relief granted by the CIT(A) was affirmed and the Revenue's grounds were dismissed. Disallowance of provision for pending expenses was rejected because the AO made only general observations, identified no specific defect in the audited accounts or the provisioning basis, and the assessee substantiated computation of the provision; consequently, the deletion was upheld and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. en-us Fri, 21 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Dec 2025 17:23:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465547 Additions for alleged bogus expenditure were untenable where the corresponding inflated sales from the same transactions had already been offered to tax and taxes were collected, and a higher amount from the same transaction for the same AY stood taxed in another taxpayer's hands without further challenge; applying the principle against double taxation and the ratio that no disallowance is warranted when the recipient has disclosed the receipt, the relief granted by the CIT(A) was affirmed and the Revenue's grounds were dismissed. Disallowance of provision for pending expenses was rejected because the AO made only general observations, identified no specific defect in the audited accounts or the provisioning basis, and the assessee substantiated computation of the provision; consequently, the deletion was upheld and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 21 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465547