Fair-rent assessment requires consideration of lease terms, valuation principles and prevailing market rent; the certificate was quashed for fresh rev...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1161 to 1180 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT quashed the reassessment proceedings initiated under s.147, finding the AO adopted a "blind approach" without proper appreciation of facts. The notice dated 31/03/2019 under s.148 and subsequent assessment order under s.143(3) read with s.147 were invalidated. The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s deletion of additions related to UK Film Tax Relief, noting these amounts had already been accounted for by EMIL in net realization figures. Regarding payments to Winford Production Ltd (UK), ITAT determined these were mere reimbursements of expenses for shooting arrangements and not fees for technical services under Indo-UK DTAA, as no technical knowledge was "made available" to the assessee. Consequently, no TDS obligation arose under s.195, and disallowance under s.40(a)(i) was deleted.
ITAT quashed the reassessment proceedings initiated under s.147, finding the AO adopted a "blind approach" without proper appreciation of facts. The notice dated 31/03/2019 under s.148 and subsequent assessment order under s.143(3) read with s.147 were invalidated. The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s deletion of additions related to UK Film Tax Relief, noting these amounts had already been accounted for by EMIL in net realization figures. Regarding payments to Winford Production Ltd (UK), ITAT determined these were mere reimbursements of expenses for shooting arrangements and not fees for technical services under Indo-UK DTAA, as no technical knowledge was "made available" to the assessee. Consequently, no TDS obligation arose under s.195, and disallowance under s.40(a)(i) was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.