Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT determined that an LLP partner voluntarily opting for account audit under second proviso to Rule 24(8) triggers mandatory audit requirement. The tribunal held that since return was filed on 17.09.2019, which is within the prescribed due date of 30.09.2019 under Section 139(1), the assessee satisfies statutory conditions. Consequently, the LLP is eligible to carry forward business losses as per Section 139(3), and the assessee's appeal was allowed, establishing that voluntary audit election does not prejudice loss carry-forward rights when timely return filing occurs.
ITAT determined that an LLP partner voluntarily opting for account audit under second proviso to Rule 24(8) triggers mandatory audit requirement. The tribunal held that since return was filed on 17.09.2019, which is within the prescribed due date of 30.09.2019 under Section 139(1), the assessee satisfies statutory conditions. Consequently, the LLP is eligible to carry forward business losses as per Section 139(3), and the assessee's appeal was allowed, establishing that voluntary audit election does not prejudice loss carry-forward rights when timely return filing occurs.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
