Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the denial of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) for late filing of the income tax return beyond the time specified u/s 139(1) or for filing the return u/s 139(4D) instead of Section 139(4C) is not justified. The Tribunal ruled that the Department could not point out any relevant provision that disentitles the assessee from claiming exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) for non-filing or late filing of the return. Consequently, the action of the lower authorities in denying the exemption on these grounds was set aside, and the Assessing Officer was directed to grant the exemption claimed u/s 10(23C)(iiiab). The assessee's appeal was allowed.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the denial of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) for late filing of the income tax return beyond the time specified u/s 139(1) or for filing the return u/s 139(4D) instead of Section 139(4C) is not justified. The Tribunal ruled that the Department could not point out any relevant provision that disentitles the assessee from claiming exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) for non-filing or late filing of the return. Consequently, the action of the lower authorities in denying the exemption on these grounds was set aside, and the Assessing Officer was directed to grant the exemption claimed u/s 10(23C)(iiiab). The assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
