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 revenue, finding that remuneration paid to the managing director was within permissible limits under Companies Act provisions as per Circular No.07/2015. The Tribunal noted no proceedings were initiated by MCA against the assessee for statutory violations, nor were adverse observations made by statutory auditors. The CIT(A)'s order was upheld, confirming that Explanation 1 to Section 37(1) was not attracted and the assessee was entitled to claim deduction for managerial remuneration under Section 37(1). ITAT also rejected the AO's invocation of Section 40A(2)(b), finding no evidence that the remuneration was excessive or unreasonable.
ITAT ruled against revenue, finding that remuneration paid to the managing director was within permissible limits under Companies Act provisions as per Circular No.07/2015. The Tribunal noted no proceedings were initiated by MCA against the assessee for statutory violations, nor were adverse observations made by statutory auditors. The CIT(A)'s order was upheld, confirming that Explanation 1 to Section 37(1) was not attracted and the assessee was entitled to claim deduction for managerial remuneration under Section 37(1). ITAT also rejected the AO's invocation of Section 40A(2)(b), finding no evidence that the remuneration was excessive or unreasonable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.