Transfer pricing comparability requires functional alignment, reliable financial data, and careful review of working capital and receivables adjustmen...
Transfer pricing rules require benchmarking corporate guarantees and associated-enterprise advances, while invalid domestic-transaction adjustments ca...
Prospective sugar export prohibition required registered letters of credit; private contracts and export quotas created no enforceable continuation ri...
Retroactive interim-moratorium exclusion permits protective asset disclosure and preservation measures against personal guarantors pending arbitration...
Penalty u/s 271D - Sale of property in cash - meaning of the term “specified sum” - The ITAT examined the definition of "specified sum" under Explanation (iv) to Section 269SS, which pertains to any sum of money receivable, whether as advance or otherwise, in relation to the transfer of an immovable property. It relied on a previous decision by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, which held that the provision applies only to advance payments and not to transactions where the final payment is made at the time of registration before the sub-registrar. - The Tribunal noted that the cash received by the assessee was not treated as an advance but as the final payment during the registration of the sale deed. Therefore, it concluded that there was no violation of Section 269SS in the given facts and circumstances.
Penalty u/s 271D - Sale of property in cash - meaning of the term “specified sum” - The ITAT examined the definition of "specified sum" under Explanation (iv) to Section 269SS, which pertains to any sum of money receivable, whether as advance or otherwise, in relation to the transfer of an immovable property. It relied on a previous decision by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, which held that the provision applies only to advance payments and not to transactions where the final payment is made at the time of registration before the sub-registrar. - The Tribunal noted that the cash received by the assessee was not treated as an advance but as the final payment during the registration of the sale deed. Therefore, it concluded that there was no violation of Section 269SS in the given facts and circumstances.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.