The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer ought not to have made 30 per cent ad-hoc disallowance of expenditure for want of evidence; disallowance of 10 per cent of expenditure incurred under the head of site maintenance expenditure would meet the ends of justice. (AY. 2017-18)
Bollineni Developers Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 213 ITD 635 (Hyd)(Trib.)
S.37(1): Business expenditure-Site maintenance expenditure-Ad-hoc disallowance of 30 per cent-Disallowance restricted to 10 percent of expenditure.
Leave a Reply