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 set aside both CIT(A) and AO orders, remanding the matter to AO for fresh adjudication on merits. The assessee, an Alternative Investment Fund Category-II registered under SEBI following cash accounting, challenged additions based on Form 26AS for income not actually received. CIT(A) erroneously dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, incorrectly assuming assessee opted for Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2024 for assessment order when it was only for penalty order. ITAT noted assessee's inconsistent treatment of TDS income across assessment years violated proper accounting principles. DR raised no serious objection to remand request. ITAT directed AO to consider assessee's submissions per law, grant requisite relief if permissible, and make additions only after providing adequate hearing opportunity. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
ITAT set aside both CIT(A) and AO orders, remanding the matter to AO for fresh adjudication on merits. The assessee, an Alternative Investment Fund Category-II registered under SEBI following cash accounting, challenged additions based on Form 26AS for income not actually received. CIT(A) erroneously dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, incorrectly assuming assessee opted for Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2024 for assessment order when it was only for penalty order. ITAT noted assessee's inconsistent treatment of TDS income across assessment years violated proper accounting principles. DR raised no serious objection to remand request. ITAT directed AO to consider assessee's submissions per law, grant requisite relief if permissible, and make additions only after providing adequate hearing opportunity. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.