Tribunal held that documents showed the assessee had paid professional fees to CCCPL for carrying out research work and non-research work, however, Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) considering it as diversion of income by assessee to CCCPL and from CCCPL to its directors. Matter was remanded for adjudicated afresh. Tribunal also held that period of lockdown is to be excluded for purpose of time limits set out in rule 34(5) of ITAT Rules for pronouncement of orders. (AY. 2012-13)
CIMS Hospital (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2021) 187 ITD 449 (Ahd.)(Trib.)
S. 40A(2) : Expenses or payments not deductible-Excessive or unreasonable-Diversion of income-Matter remanded-lockdown was in force was to excluded for purpose of time limits set out in rule 34(5) of ITAT Rules for pronouncement of orders. [ITAT R. 34(5)]