Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Taxability of the remuneration received from the partnership firm and interest on capital contribution made by the partner of the firm in the absence of any business income in the hands of the firm - The reasoning of the CIT(A) that there was no disallowance made by the Assessing Officer u/s.40B and, therefore, the question of applicability of proviso does not arise, in our considered opinion, is unreasonable. The question of disallowance by the Assessing Officer arises only in the event of claim for allowance by the firm. When there was no claim made by the assessee firm u/s. 40B, the question of disallowance does not arise. - AT
Taxability of the remuneration received from the partnership firm and interest on capital contribution made by the partner of the firm in the absence of any business income in the hands of the firm - The reasoning of the CIT(A) that there was no disallowance made by the Assessing Officer u/s.40B and, therefore, the question of applicability of proviso does not arise, in our considered opinion, is unreasonable. The question of disallowance by the Assessing Officer arises only in the event of claim for allowance by the firm. When there was no claim made by the assessee firm u/s. 40B, the question of disallowance does not arise. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.