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" ?
The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order concerning STCG on an ancestral property allegedly sold by the assessee with ten co-owners for Rs. 9.08 crores. The Tribunal remanded the case to the JAO to determine whether the assessee actually transferred any immovable property in AY 2016-17. If no transfer occurred, no capital gain would be taxable; if a transfer is confirmed, capital gains should be assessed according to law. Similarly, the penalties under s.271(1)(c) for concealment of income and s.271F for non-filing of returns were set aside, with instructions that penalties may only be imposed after the JAO completes the reassessment and establishes taxable income exceeding the threshold limit.
The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order concerning STCG on an ancestral property allegedly sold by the assessee with ten co-owners for Rs. 9.08 crores. The Tribunal remanded the case to the JAO to determine whether the assessee actually transferred any immovable property in AY 2016-17. If no transfer occurred, no capital gain would be taxable; if a transfer is confirmed, capital gains should be assessed according to law. Similarly, the penalties under s.271(1)(c) for concealment of income and s.271F for non-filing of returns were set aside, with instructions that penalties may only be imposed after the JAO completes the reassessment and establishes taxable income exceeding the threshold limit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
