Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Deduction of lease rent - lumpsum amount paid by the appellant/assessee for the entire tenure of the lease i.e. 99 years - matching principle - Given the facts obtaining in this case, the matching principle would have no applicability. The appellant/assessee chose to incur the liability of a crystallised amount in the period relevant to the AY in issue i.e. AY 2007-2008, and therefore, it was entitled to seek deduction of the amount which fulfilled the attributes - The expenditure was not in the nature of capital expenditure or a personal expense, It was expended fully and exclusively for the purposes of the business and; It did not fall within the realm of any provision of the Act which prohibited the appellant/assessee from claiming this deduction - HC
Deduction of lease rent - lumpsum amount paid by the appellant/assessee for the entire tenure of the lease i.e. 99 years - matching principle - Given the facts obtaining in this case, the matching principle would have no applicability. The appellant/assessee chose to incur the liability of a crystallised amount in the period relevant to the AY in issue i.e. AY 2007-2008, and therefore, it was entitled to seek deduction of the amount which fulfilled the attributes - The expenditure was not in the nature of capital expenditure or a personal expense, It was expended fully and exclusively for the purposes of the business and; It did not fall within the realm of any provision of the Act which prohibited the appellant/assessee from claiming this deduction - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
