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 reopening of assessment u/s 147 was invalid. The AO failed to establish a cogent 'reason to believe' regarding alleged bogus Long Term Capital Gains, merely acting on unsubstantiated information from Investigation Wing. The tribunal emphasized that 'reason to believe' is distinct from 'suspicion', and the AO's approach was casual and robotic. Without concrete material demonstrating nexus between entry operators and the assessee, the addition u/s 68 was deemed unsustainable. The capital gains from share transactions could not be arbitrarily labeled as sham profits. Consequently, the assessment reopening and consequent additions were quashed, decisively ruling in favor of the assessee.
ITAT held that reopening of assessment u/s 147 was invalid. The AO failed to establish a cogent 'reason to believe' regarding alleged bogus Long Term Capital Gains, merely acting on unsubstantiated information from Investigation Wing. The tribunal emphasized that 'reason to believe' is distinct from 'suspicion', and the AO's approach was casual and robotic. Without concrete material demonstrating nexus between entry operators and the assessee, the addition u/s 68 was deemed unsustainable. The capital gains from share transactions could not be arbitrarily labeled as sham profits. Consequently, the assessment reopening and consequent additions were quashed, decisively ruling in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.