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 ITAT, an Appellate Tribunal, addressed the re-computation of long-term capital gain related to determining the cost of improvement for constructing a concrete bridge over a rivulet in front of a shop to enhance accessibility. The Tribunal found that the expenditure on the bridge was capital in nature, essential for improving access to the shop and increasing footfall and value. The expenditure did not qualify as revenue expenditure as it directly contributed to enhancing business activities. The Tribunal noted that the evidence, including site plans and photographs, supported the expenditure and invalidated the AO's disallowance based on presumption. Citing judicial precedents, the Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, ruling that the cost of the bridge construction was a legitimate capital expenditure and should be deductible for taxation purposes.
The ITAT, an Appellate Tribunal, addressed the re-computation of long-term capital gain related to determining the cost of improvement for constructing a concrete bridge over a rivulet in front of a shop to enhance accessibility. The Tribunal found that the expenditure on the bridge was capital in nature, essential for improving access to the shop and increasing footfall and value. The expenditure did not qualify as revenue expenditure as it directly contributed to enhancing business activities. The Tribunal noted that the evidence, including site plans and photographs, supported the expenditure and invalidated the AO's disallowance based on presumption. Citing judicial precedents, the Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, ruling that the cost of the bridge construction was a legitimate capital expenditure and should be deductible for taxation purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.