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...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 154 read with Section 143(3) and by the CIT(A). The AO erred in passing the order u/s 154 by making the disallowance of amortization of telecom license u/s 35ABB and depreciation on right to use telecom spectrum u/s 32. The CIT(A) also erred by disallowing an amount which was not part of the appeal before them. The ITAT held that the CIT(A) exercised jurisdiction beyond the scope of the appeal by disallowing an amount which was part of separate appeal proceedings. Accordingly, the ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and additional grounds, deleting the disallowances made by the AO and CIT(A).
The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 154 read with Section 143(3) and by the CIT(A). The AO erred in passing the order u/s 154 by making the disallowance of amortization of telecom license u/s 35ABB and depreciation on right to use telecom spectrum u/s 32. The CIT(A) also erred by disallowing an amount which was not part of the appeal before them. The ITAT held that the CIT(A) exercised jurisdiction beyond the scope of the appeal by disallowing an amount which was part of separate appeal proceedings. Accordingly, the ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and additional grounds, deleting the disallowances made by the AO and CIT(A).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
