Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Dividend stripping on mutual fund units: the ITAT held that dividend could not be treated as a return of capital or deducted from cost of acquisition without a specific statutory basis. Section 94's anti-dividend stripping rule applies only when its conditions are cumulatively satisfied; here, the required purchase and sale timing conditions were not both met, so the provision was inapplicable. General survey findings and alleged SEBI violations, without material linking the assessee to manipulation, did not justify branding the transaction as sham. The addition was deleted on merits.
Dividend stripping on mutual fund units: the ITAT held that dividend could not be treated as a return of capital or deducted from cost of acquisition without a specific statutory basis. Section 94's anti-dividend stripping rule applies only when its conditions are cumulatively satisfied; here, the required purchase and sale timing conditions were not both met, so the provision was inapplicable. General survey findings and alleged SEBI violations, without material linking the assessee to manipulation, did not justify branding the transaction as sham. The addition was deleted on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
