Held that the Assessing Officer had travelled beyond the limited scrutiny parameters for which the case was selected; hence, the addition was legally impermissible, and the Assessing Officer was directed to delete the addition made under section 36(1)(iii). (AY. 2015-16)
ACIT v. B.K. Sales Corporation. (2025) 213 ITD 559 (Delhi) (Trib.)
S. 36(1)(iii): Interest on borrowed capital-Limited scrutiny-Funds invested in short-term deposits-Assessing Officer had travelled beyond the limited scrutiny parameters for which the case was selected-Addition was deleted. [S. 143(3)]
Leave a Reply