Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Validity of order passed by the ITSC - Settlement of a case - Bogus purchases and Accommodation entries - ITSC allowed certain amounts to be capitalized with depreciation - ITSC also granted immunity from penalties and prosecution - The High Court concluded that the ITSC acted within its powers in accepting the expenditure claims based on the documents seized during raids, which showed the cash generated from the bogus purchases was indeed used for stated capital expenditures. Regarding the deduction under Section 80IB(10), the High Court supported the ITSC’s decision, stating that the ITSC appropriately allowed the deduction after considering the ad hoc disallowances made in the previous years which impacted the project's profitability in the assessment year 2009-10. - The High Court dismissed the Revenue’s petition, upholding the ITSC’s order.
Validity of order passed by the ITSC - Settlement of a case - Bogus purchases and Accommodation entries - ITSC allowed certain amounts to be capitalized with depreciation - ITSC also granted immunity from penalties and prosecution - The High Court concluded that the ITSC acted within its powers in accepting the expenditure claims based on the documents seized during raids, which showed the cash generated from the bogus purchases was indeed used for stated capital expenditures. Regarding the deduction under Section 80IB(10), the High Court supported the ITSC’s decision, stating that the ITSC appropriately allowed the deduction after considering the ad hoc disallowances made in the previous years which impacted the project's profitability in the assessment year 2009-10. - The High Court dismissed the Revenue’s petition, upholding the ITSC’s order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
