Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The ITAT upheld the genuineness of the software development and maintenance charges paid to TFMSS by the assessee trust, rejecting the Revenue's contention that the transactions were sham and intended to divert funds to related parties for personal benefit. The Tribunal found the payments were made at fair market value for substantive services rendered, supported by credible evidence including sworn statements and extensive email correspondence, which the lower authorities disregarded. The disallowance of business consultancy charges was also quashed, as the AO and CIT(A) failed to properly assess the claim and relied on conjecture without adequate evidence. The Tribunal noted inconsistency in the Revenue's approach across assessment years and emphasized that disallowance cannot be based on mere hypothesis. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, restoring the assessee's claims for software and consultancy expenses in full.
The ITAT upheld the genuineness of the software development and maintenance charges paid to TFMSS by the assessee trust, rejecting the Revenue's contention that the transactions were sham and intended to divert funds to related parties for personal benefit. The Tribunal found the payments were made at fair market value for substantive services rendered, supported by credible evidence including sworn statements and extensive email correspondence, which the lower authorities disregarded. The disallowance of business consultancy charges was also quashed, as the AO and CIT(A) failed to properly assess the claim and relied on conjecture without adequate evidence. The Tribunal noted inconsistency in the Revenue's approach across assessment years and emphasized that disallowance cannot be based on mere hypothesis. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, restoring the assessee's claims for software and consultancy expenses in full.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.