Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1061 to 1080 of 96136 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Rectification was held maintainable where the earlier appellate direction wrongly assumed that land cost had not already been debited in the assessee's accounts and, under the joint development arrangement, treated construction cost as the assessee's cost. The Tribunal held that no provision allowed substitution of actual cost with fair market value or another notional value for computing profits for section 80-IB(10), so the deduction had to be recomputed on the profits disclosed in the Profit and Loss Account. It also held that the doctrine of merger did not apply because the earlier round had decided only eligibility in principle, not quantification, making rejection of rectification on merger grounds unjustified.
Rectification was held maintainable where the earlier appellate direction wrongly assumed that land cost had not already been debited in the assessee's accounts and, under the joint development arrangement, treated construction cost as the assessee's cost. The Tribunal held that no provision allowed substitution of actual cost with fair market value or another notional value for computing profits for section 80-IB(10), so the deduction had to be recomputed on the profits disclosed in the Profit and Loss Account. It also held that the doctrine of merger did not apply because the earlier round had decided only eligibility in principle, not quantification, making rejection of rectification on merger grounds unjustified.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.