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 ruled against penalty under s.270A for under-reporting income. Taxpayer met substantive conditions for immunity under s.270AA(1) by paying assessed tax and interest within prescribed time after declaring Rs.30 lakhs under PMGKY scheme. While Form 68 wasn't filed with AO, ITAT held this procedural omission shouldn't override substantive compliance. Citing principle that technical procedures shouldn't impede substantial justice, tribunal found non-filing of Form 68 was merely technical breach. Since taxpayer satisfied core requirements of s.270AA(1)(a)&(b), immunity from penalty was granted despite procedural lapse. Appeal decided in taxpayer's favor, setting aside penalty under s.270A.
ITAT ruled against penalty under s.270A for under-reporting income. Taxpayer met substantive conditions for immunity under s.270AA(1) by paying assessed tax and interest within prescribed time after declaring Rs.30 lakhs under PMGKY scheme. While Form 68 wasn't filed with AO, ITAT held this procedural omission shouldn't override substantive compliance. Citing principle that technical procedures shouldn't impede substantial justice, tribunal found non-filing of Form 68 was merely technical breach. Since taxpayer satisfied core requirements of s.270AA(1)(a)&(b), immunity from penalty was granted despite procedural lapse. Appeal decided in taxpayer's favor, setting aside penalty under s.270A.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.