Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1161 to 1180 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court held that the Assessing Officer cannot disallow losses merely based on assumptions and surmises regarding the commercial expediency of transactions undertaken by the assessee. The transaction for sale and purchase of dies was a pure commercial transaction entered into by the assessee in its commercial wisdom, and the fact that the assessee incurred a loss in the said transaction was not disputed. There was no allegation of any undisclosed consideration or clandestine transaction to reverse the loss. The Assessing Officer made the addition solely based on their perception of what was commercially expedient, which is not within their purview. The assessee had justified its commercial decision by reflecting enhanced turnover and profits from its business, but even if profits were not earned, it would not make a difference, as the examination is limited to whether the transactions were genuine, not whether they were commercially expedient. The High Court found no material other than suspicion to justify the addition and decided in favor of the assessee.
The High Court held that the Assessing Officer cannot disallow losses merely based on assumptions and surmises regarding the commercial expediency of transactions undertaken by the assessee. The transaction for sale and purchase of dies was a pure commercial transaction entered into by the assessee in its commercial wisdom, and the fact that the assessee incurred a loss in the said transaction was not disputed. There was no allegation of any undisclosed consideration or clandestine transaction to reverse the loss. The Assessing Officer made the addition solely based on their perception of what was commercially expedient, which is not within their purview. The assessee had justified its commercial decision by reflecting enhanced turnover and profits from its business, but even if profits were not earned, it would not make a difference, as the examination is limited to whether the transactions were genuine, not whether they were commercially expedient. The High Court found no material other than suspicion to justify the addition and decided in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.