https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465721 The dominant issue was disallowance of deduction under s.80IA by invoking s.80IA(10). The Tribunal held that each assessment year is separate and, following its earlier order in the same assessee's case, the Revenue had not produced material to rebut the factual findings accepted by the first appellate authority; business expenditure and arrangements must be tested from the standpoint of commercial expediency and not on the AO's subjective view. The disallowance under s.80IA was therefore deleted. A second issue concerned disallowance of managerial support/service charges paid to related parties for alleged lack of demonstrated benefit. Applying the earlier coordinate bench decision on identical facts, the disallowance was deleted. en-us Fri, 02 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Jan 2026 22:17:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465721 The dominant issue was disallowance of deduction under s.80IA by invoking s.80IA(10). The Tribunal held that each assessment year is separate and, following its earlier order in the same assessee's case, the Revenue had not produced material to rebut the factual findings accepted by the first appellate authority; business expenditure and arrangements must be tested from the standpoint of commercial expediency and not on the AO's subjective view. The disallowance under s.80IA was therefore deleted. A second issue concerned disallowance of managerial support/service charges paid to related parties for alleged lack of demonstrated benefit. Applying the earlier coordinate bench decision on identical facts, the disallowance was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 02 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465721