Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
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...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court considered a case involving income from Other Sources u/s 56 (viib). The Assessing Officer rejected the valuation report provided by the assessee-company, claiming the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method used was invalid. The CIT(A) overturned the addition, stating no consideration was received for the shares issued. The High Court upheld this decision, noting Section 56 (2) (viib) does not apply without consideration. It also ruled the AO cannot impose the Net Asset Value method over DCF, as the latter is permissible u/s Rule 11UA (2)(d). The Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
The High Court considered a case involving income from Other Sources u/s 56 (viib). The Assessing Officer rejected the valuation report provided by the assessee-company, claiming the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method used was invalid. The CIT(A) overturned the addition, stating no consideration was received for the shares issued. The High Court upheld this decision, noting Section 56 (2) (viib) does not apply without consideration. It also ruled the AO cannot impose the Net Asset Value method over DCF, as the latter is permissible u/s Rule 11UA (2)(d). The Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.