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 upheld the assessee's claim for dividend income exemption under Section 10(35) and short-term capital loss set-off. The tribunal found no evidence of manipulative transactions with J.M. Financial Asset Management Ltd. Absent specific SEBI enquiry or proof of tax benefit manipulation, the investment was deemed genuine. The fund's market performance and transparent investment process supported the assessee's position. Section 94(7) was not applicable, and the capital loss was allowable under the Income Tax Act. CIT(A)'s order deleting the disallowance was confirmed, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed.
ITAT upheld the assessee's claim for dividend income exemption under Section 10(35) and short-term capital loss set-off. The tribunal found no evidence of manipulative transactions with J.M. Financial Asset Management Ltd. Absent specific SEBI enquiry or proof of tax benefit manipulation, the investment was deemed genuine. The fund's market performance and transparent investment process supported the assessee's position. Section 94(7) was not applicable, and the capital loss was allowable under the Income Tax Act. CIT(A)'s order deleting the disallowance was confirmed, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.