Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return filing...
Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Page of 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95673 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000 were made, and the assessee provided a statement on oath, affidavits from the vendor, and explanations about the vendor's father's ill health and jail term, as well as the precondition of cash payment for the land deal. The appellate authority erred in rejecting these submissions and not considering business expediency. Regarding development expenses, the assessing officer disallowed 10% due to lack of vouchers, which was reduced to 5% by the appellate authority. Since no further evidence was produced, the Appellate Tribunal declined to interfere with the appellate authority's order on this issue.
Cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000 were made, and the assessee provided a statement on oath, affidavits from the vendor, and explanations about the vendor's father's ill health and jail term, as well as the precondition of cash payment for the land deal. The appellate authority erred in rejecting these submissions and not considering business expediency. Regarding development expenses, the assessing officer disallowed 10% due to lack of vouchers, which was reduced to 5% by the appellate authority. Since no further evidence was produced, the Appellate Tribunal declined to interfere with the appellate authority's order on this issue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.