Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
261 to 280 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
One-time settlement paid to contractors was treated as revenue business expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes; the Tribunal accepted that the contractors remained responsible for their workers, tax was deducted at source, and the payments were made to avoid disruption during restructuring, so the full deduction was allowed and the four-fifths disallowance deleted. The disallowance linked to exempt income was remitted because the Assessing Officer proceeded on the mistaken assumption that no suo motu disallowance existed, while the assessee had not fully supported its computation, requiring fresh examination after considering the computation and further material. The treaty-rate claim on dividend distribution tax was admitted as a pure legal ground and remitted for decision after the Supreme Court's final ruling on the controversy.
One-time settlement paid to contractors was treated as revenue business expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes; the Tribunal accepted that the contractors remained responsible for their workers, tax was deducted at source, and the payments were made to avoid disruption during restructuring, so the full deduction was allowed and the four-fifths disallowance deleted. The disallowance linked to exempt income was remitted because the Assessing Officer proceeded on the mistaken assumption that no suo motu disallowance existed, while the assessee had not fully supported its computation, requiring fresh examination after considering the computation and further material. The treaty-rate claim on dividend distribution tax was admitted as a pure legal ground and remitted for decision after the Supreme Court's final ruling on the controversy.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.