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" ?
The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving an addition u/s 56(2)(x)(B) due to the purchase of land property where the stamp value exceeded the consideration paid by more than Rs. 50,000. The assessee argued that the land was purchased as a beneficial owner in the previous year before the incorporation of the company. The Tribunal found that the MOU dated 30-06-2016 was acted upon, establishing that the land was purchased by the promoters on behalf of the company before its incorporation. The conveyance deed executed later was deemed a formality to fulfill the earlier promise/contract. The Tribunal held that the lower authority erred in invoking section 56(2)(x)(B) based on the stamp duty paid on the conveyance deed. The addition was directed to be deleted, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.
The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving an addition u/s 56(2)(x)(B) due to the purchase of land property where the stamp value exceeded the consideration paid by more than Rs. 50,000. The assessee argued that the land was purchased as a beneficial owner in the previous year before the incorporation of the company. The Tribunal found that the MOU dated 30-06-2016 was acted upon, establishing that the land was purchased by the promoters on behalf of the company before its incorporation. The conveyance deed executed later was deemed a formality to fulfill the earlier promise/contract. The Tribunal held that the lower authority erred in invoking section 56(2)(x)(B) based on the stamp duty paid on the conveyance deed. The addition was directed to be deleted, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
