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 held that the addition under section 56(2)(x)(b) for difference between the FMV determined by the DVO and the purchase price was not sustainable, as the discrepancy was only 4%, falling within the statutory tolerance band of 5% introduced from 01/04/2019. The DVO's valuation was based on flats situated on higher floors, which typically command higher prices, whereas the assessee's flat was on a lower floor, justifying the lower purchase price. Consequently, the tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, ruling that no addition could be made when the difference between the stamp duty value and actual consideration is below the prescribed threshold.
The ITAT held that the addition under section 56(2)(x)(b) for difference between the FMV determined by the DVO and the purchase price was not sustainable, as the discrepancy was only 4%, falling within the statutory tolerance band of 5% introduced from 01/04/2019. The DVO's valuation was based on flats situated on higher floors, which typically command higher prices, whereas the assessee's flat was on a lower floor, justifying the lower purchase price. Consequently, the tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, ruling that no addition could be made when the difference between the stamp duty value and actual consideration is below the prescribed threshold.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.