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" ?
The ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal regarding additions under section 153C, holding that incriminating documents found at the premises of an erstwhile partner could not be attributed to the assessee firm or its present partners. Only the erstwhile partner bore the legal presumption under section 292C. No incriminating material was found on the assessee, and additions based on such documents were rightly deleted. Regarding the addition under section 69B for alleged unexplained investment, the Tribunal found no concrete evidence of cash investment by the assessee and rejected the DVO's valuation, which was subjective and based on CPWD rates. The Tribunal further held that the AO could not rely on DVO valuation without rejecting the assessee's books, in line with established jurisdictional precedent. Allowing concessions for self-supervision and rate differentials, the Tribunal deleted the impugned addition in full, allowing the assessee's appeal.
The ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal regarding additions under section 153C, holding that incriminating documents found at the premises of an erstwhile partner could not be attributed to the assessee firm or its present partners. Only the erstwhile partner bore the legal presumption under section 292C. No incriminating material was found on the assessee, and additions based on such documents were rightly deleted. Regarding the addition under section 69B for alleged unexplained investment, the Tribunal found no concrete evidence of cash investment by the assessee and rejected the DVO's valuation, which was subjective and based on CPWD rates. The Tribunal further held that the AO could not rely on DVO valuation without rejecting the assessee's books, in line with established jurisdictional precedent. Allowing concessions for self-supervision and rate differentials, the Tribunal deleted the impugned addition in full, allowing the assessee's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.