Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT upheld the allowability of depreciation on goodwill arising from a court-sanctioned amalgamation under section 32(1)(ii), rejecting the AO's disallowance and reliance on AS-26 and precedent. The tribunal affirmed that once depreciation is allowed, the carry-forward of unabsorbed depreciation is a vested right and cannot be denied without reversal by a competent forum, thereby dismissing the AO's disallowance of brought-forward depreciation. Product registration expenses were held to be revenue in nature and deductible under section 37(1), not capital expenditure. The claim for deduction under section 80-IC was sustained, as the Baddi Unit was found to have operational autonomy and no nexus was established to allocate corporate expenses to it. Scrap income was deemed eligible for deduction under section 80-IC, consistent with prior assessments. Finally, the enhanced income due to disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was held eligible for deduction under section 80-IC. All revenue appeals were dismissed.
The ITAT upheld the allowability of depreciation on goodwill arising from a court-sanctioned amalgamation under section 32(1)(ii), rejecting the AO's disallowance and reliance on AS-26 and precedent. The tribunal affirmed that once depreciation is allowed, the carry-forward of unabsorbed depreciation is a vested right and cannot be denied without reversal by a competent forum, thereby dismissing the AO's disallowance of brought-forward depreciation. Product registration expenses were held to be revenue in nature and deductible under section 37(1), not capital expenditure. The claim for deduction under section 80-IC was sustained, as the Baddi Unit was found to have operational autonomy and no nexus was established to allocate corporate expenses to it. Scrap income was deemed eligible for deduction under section 80-IC, consistent with prior assessments. Finally, the enhanced income due to disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was held eligible for deduction under section 80-IC. All revenue appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
