Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
Shares allotted at premium based on valuation report following DCF method. AO rejected report without pointing errors. ITAT held valuation not an exact science, cannot be done with arithmetic precision. Shares subscribed by outside investor, a reputed corporate group, not a related party. Hence, no infirmity in CIT(A) order deleting addition u/s 56(2)(viib). Disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) on interest expenditure deleted by CIT(A) as zero coupon debentures were consideration for transfer of assets, not investment. ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s view. Interest-free deposit given had sufficient own funds, no disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) warranted as per Bombay High Court ruling. Assessee's appeal allowed on this issue.
Shares allotted at premium based on valuation report following DCF method. AO rejected report without pointing errors. ITAT held valuation not an exact science, cannot be done with arithmetic precision. Shares subscribed by outside investor, a reputed corporate group, not a related party. Hence, no infirmity in CIT(A) order deleting addition u/s 56(2)(viib). Disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) on interest expenditure deleted by CIT(A) as zero coupon debentures were consideration for transfer of assets, not investment. ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s view. Interest-free deposit given had sufficient own funds, no disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) warranted as per Bombay High Court ruling. Assessee's appeal allowed on this issue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
