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 assessee was allowed to claim depreciation on assets held in the name of directors, based on the principle of beneficial ownership recognized by the Supreme Court. The assessee had possession, control, and dominion over the assets used for business purposes, satisfying the broader interpretation of "owner" u/s 32. The Tribunal also deleted the 20% disallowance of expenses by the Assessing Officer, citing lack of concrete evidence and justification through increased turnover and consistent profit margins. Regarding the protective addition u/s 68 for unsecured loans, the Tribunal noted the assessee's substantial evidence establishing identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness. The Assessing Officer's failure to conduct further investigations rendered the protective addition unjustified. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal on all grounds, emphasizing the principles of beneficial ownership, evidence-based disallowances, and substantive assessments preceding protective assessments.
The assessee was allowed to claim depreciation on assets held in the name of directors, based on the principle of beneficial ownership recognized by the Supreme Court. The assessee had possession, control, and dominion over the assets used for business purposes, satisfying the broader interpretation of "owner" u/s 32. The Tribunal also deleted the 20% disallowance of expenses by the Assessing Officer, citing lack of concrete evidence and justification through increased turnover and consistent profit margins. Regarding the protective addition u/s 68 for unsecured loans, the Tribunal noted the assessee's substantial evidence establishing identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness. The Assessing Officer's failure to conduct further investigations rendered the protective addition unjustified. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal on all grounds, emphasizing the principles of beneficial ownership, evidence-based disallowances, and substantive assessments preceding protective assessments.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.