Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
321 to 340 of 95875 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 CIT(A)'s order, rejecting revenue's penalty claim under section 270A against a charitable trust. The tribunal found no conditions met for penalty imposition, noting the assessee voluntarily filed a revised computation with corrected revenue expenditure. The tribunal determined the excess expenditure claim was within the statutory 15% limit under section 11(1)(a), and the discrepancy did not constitute a deliberate attempt to under-report income. Consequently, the penalty was deleted, and the decision was rendered in favor of the assessee.
ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s order, rejecting revenue's penalty claim under section 270A against a charitable trust. The tribunal found no conditions met for penalty imposition, noting the assessee voluntarily filed a revised computation with corrected revenue expenditure. The tribunal determined the excess expenditure claim was within the statutory 15% limit under section 11(1)(a), and the discrepancy did not constitute a deliberate attempt to under-report income. Consequently, the penalty was deleted, and the decision was rendered in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.