Omitted specified domestic transaction provision invalidates related-party expenditure transfer-pricing references and assessments based on consequent...
Preventive suspension requires an immediate continuing threat and cannot become indefinite without inquiry, fresh evidence, or proportionate safeguard...
The issue revolved around whether payments made by the Assessee to various institutions could be treated as allowable expenses u/s 37(1) or disallowed u/s 40A(9). The court held that the payments were for local welfare measures benefiting the business, not payments required by law, and thus fell u/s 37(1). The Memorandum of Settlement showed a nexus between the social welfare activities and the business. Section 40A(9) was deemed inapplicable, and the Tribunal rightfully deleted the disallowance. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision in favor of the Assessee, emphasizing that the payments were not mandated by industrial law.
The issue revolved around whether payments made by the Assessee to various institutions could be treated as allowable expenses u/s 37(1) or disallowed u/s 40A(9). The court held that the payments were for local welfare measures benefiting the business, not payments required by law, and thus fell u/s 37(1). The Memorandum of Settlement showed a nexus between the social welfare activities and the business. Section 40A(9) was deemed inapplicable, and the Tribunal rightfully deleted the disallowance. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision in favor of the Assessee, emphasizing that the payments were not mandated by industrial law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
