<?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>Contract expenditure allowed where unrebutted documentary evidence proved subcontract payments and supported the corresponding income claim.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98341</link>
    <description>Contract expenditure was held to be allowable where the assessee substantiated the subcontract payments with a complete documentary trail, including the principal award, subcontracting documents, ledger accounts, confirmations, audited financial statements and bank statements. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals) had not rebutted these materials or made any independent verification from the concerned parties. Since the Revenue had accepted the contract receipts as income, it could not deny the corresponding expenditure on the same factual matrix. The assessee was found to have discharged the onus, and the entire disallowance of subcontract expenses was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2026 08:50:44 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2026 08:50:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=894483" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Contract expenditure allowed where unrebutted documentary evidence proved subcontract payments and supported the corresponding income claim.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98341</link>
      <description>Contract expenditure was held to be allowable where the assessee substantiated the subcontract payments with a complete documentary trail, including the principal award, subcontracting documents, ledger accounts, confirmations, audited financial statements and bank statements. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals) had not rebutted these materials or made any independent verification from the concerned parties. Since the Revenue had accepted the contract receipts as income, it could not deny the corresponding expenditure on the same factual matrix. The assessee was found to have discharged the onus, and the entire disallowance of subcontract expenses was deleted.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2026 08:50:44 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98341</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>