Transfer pricing comparables and adjustments: Tribunal revisits loss-maker status, segmental comparability, working capital relief, and risk allocatio...
Business expenditure disallowance failed where commission, related-party salary and promotion payments were supported by records and inquiry was inade...
Exemption u/s 11 - Inadequate rent received by the respondent/assessee - The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) that the respondent had not taken any security deposit from Hamdard Dawakhana (Wakf) and thereby violated Section 13(2)(b) of the Act, has also been stated only to be rejected. Security Deposit may be one of the factors to be taken into consideration by the Assessing Officer for coming to a conclusion if the rent was “adequate”, however, it cannot be a sole determinative factor. - HC
Exemption u/s 11 - Inadequate rent received by the respondent/assessee - The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) that the respondent had not taken any security deposit from Hamdard Dawakhana (Wakf) and thereby violated Section 13(2)(b) of the Act, has also been stated only to be rejected. Security Deposit may be one of the factors to be taken into consideration by the Assessing Officer for coming to a conclusion if the rent was “adequate”, however, it cannot be a sole determinative factor. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
