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" ?
Assessee failed to declare Long Term Capital Loss (LTCL) on sale of shares of ECL and Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on sale of shares of Saya in the return of income. ECL and Saya appear to be penny stock companies. Assessee seemingly dealt in shares of these companies but did not reflect profits/losses correctly in the return. Assessing Officer (AO) failed to inquire into this aspect during assessment proceedings. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) erred in directing AO to assess income u/s 69A read with Section 115BBE, binding AO without independent application of mind. Assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue's interest as AO did not examine treatment of LTCL and LTCG. AO directed to carry out de-novo assessment as per law after giving assessee opportunity of hearing. Decided against assessee by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).
Assessee failed to declare Long Term Capital Loss (LTCL) on sale of shares of ECL and Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on sale of shares of Saya in the return of income. ECL and Saya appear to be penny stock companies. Assessee seemingly dealt in shares of these companies but did not reflect profits/losses correctly in the return. Assessing Officer (AO) failed to inquire into this aspect during assessment proceedings. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) erred in directing AO to assess income u/s 69A read with Section 115BBE, binding AO without independent application of mind. Assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue's interest as AO did not examine treatment of LTCL and LTCG. AO directed to carry out de-novo assessment as per law after giving assessee opportunity of hearing. Decided against assessee by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
