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" ?
ITAT held that income declared during survey proceedings was properly assessed as business income at normal tax rates rather than under s.115BBE. The assessee's voluntary disclosure during survey itself, before assessment completion, distinguished this case. Following Dharti Estate precedent, since AO had conducted due diligence and consciously treated the undisclosed amounts as business income after verifying evidence and allowing related partner payments, Pr.CIT's revision under s.263 was invalid. ITAT emphasized that s.263 powers are limited to examining if order is erroneous/prejudicial to revenue, not re-adjudicating assessment merits. Revision proceedings quashed in assessee's favor as AO's treatment was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to revenue interests.
ITAT held that income declared during survey proceedings was properly assessed as business income at normal tax rates rather than under s.115BBE. The assessee's voluntary disclosure during survey itself, before assessment completion, distinguished this case. Following Dharti Estate precedent, since AO had conducted due diligence and consciously treated the undisclosed amounts as business income after verifying evidence and allowing related partner payments, Pr.CIT's revision under s.263 was invalid. ITAT emphasized that s.263 powers are limited to examining if order is erroneous/prejudicial to revenue, not re-adjudicating assessment merits. Revision proceedings quashed in assessee's favor as AO's treatment was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to revenue interests.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.