Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Section 35D(2)(c) was held to allow deduction only to a company for expenditure connected with public subscription of its shares or debentures. The Tribunal applied strict construction and refused to extend that relief to a REIT constituted as a trust, since a business trust is neither a company nor deemed to be one under the Act. It further held that REIT units are legally distinct from shares or debentures, and their regulatory treatment under SEBI norms does not change that character for section 35D(2)(c). The disallowance of the public issue expense claim was therefore sustained.
Section 35D(2)(c) was held to allow deduction only to a company for expenditure connected with public subscription of its shares or debentures. The Tribunal applied strict construction and refused to extend that relief to a REIT constituted as a trust, since a business trust is neither a company nor deemed to be one under the Act. It further held that REIT units are legally distinct from shares or debentures, and their regulatory treatment under SEBI norms does not change that character for section 35D(2)(c). The disallowance of the public issue expense claim was therefore sustained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.