Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT addressed two main issues: 1. TP Adjustment for...
ITAT says corporate guarantee to AE is not a financial service by assessee. No profit shifting or burden. Interest adjustment on AEs' receivables unjustified.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
The ITAT addressed two main issues: 1. TP Adjustment for corporate guarantee to AE: As the assessee did not provide guarantees to unrelated parties, it was not a financial service. The low profit rate of AE and adequate security indicated no profit shifting. Citing PCIT Vs Redington, the adjustment was deleted as it did not affect the assessee's finances. 2. Addition of interest on overdue receivables from AEs: TPO applied a 60-day credit policy, contrary to the assessee's 180-day policy in line with RBI guidelines. Following GSS Infotech Ltd, interest was not charged to AEs or non-AEs, so adding notional interest was unjustified. Referring to CIT Vs Indo American Jewellery Ltd, the interest adjustment was deleted.
The ITAT addressed two main issues: 1. TP Adjustment for corporate guarantee to AE: As the assessee did not provide guarantees to unrelated parties, it was not a financial service. The low profit rate of AE and adequate security indicated no profit shifting. Citing PCIT Vs Redington, the adjustment was deleted as it did not affect the assessee's finances. 2. Addition of interest on overdue receivables from AEs: TPO applied a 60-day credit policy, contrary to the assessee's 180-day policy in line with RBI guidelines. Following GSS Infotech Ltd, interest was not charged to AEs or non-AEs, so adding notional interest was unjustified. Referring to CIT Vs Indo American Jewellery Ltd, the interest adjustment was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
