Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
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...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
For deduction claims of eligible industrial units, only expenditure having a direct nexus with that undertaking can be reduced from profits; common R&D costs cannot be allocated to the units absent proof that they relate to those units. The Court accepted the Tribunal's factual finding that the R&D projects were unrelated to the products manufactured by the deduction-claiming units, were future-oriented and uncertain, and were not shown by the Assessing Officer to pertain to those units. In the absence of nexus, the allocation-based disallowance was unwarranted, no substantial question of law arose, and the Revenue's challenge was rejected.
For deduction claims of eligible industrial units, only expenditure having a direct nexus with that undertaking can be reduced from profits; common R&D costs cannot be allocated to the units absent proof that they relate to those units. The Court accepted the Tribunal's factual finding that the R&D projects were unrelated to the products manufactured by the deduction-claiming units, were future-oriented and uncertain, and were not shown by the Assessing Officer to pertain to those units. In the absence of nexus, the allocation-based disallowance was unwarranted, no substantial question of law arose, and the Revenue's challenge was rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.