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 donations received by the assessee trust with specific directions for use in its core activities qualify as corpus donations under section 11(1)(d). Despite the absence of explicit mention of "corpus" on all receipts, the tribunal found that the donors intended the funds to be capital contributions for the trust's objectives, not general donations. The ruling clarified that corpus includes capital contributions made with the intent to be held and utilized for the trust's purposes, and such receipts are exempt from tax. Consequently, the AO's treatment of the donations as general receipts was reversed, and the donations were directed to be treated as corpus donations, thereby exempting them from tax. The assessee's appeal was allowed.
The ITAT held that donations received by the assessee trust with specific directions for use in its core activities qualify as corpus donations under section 11(1)(d). Despite the absence of explicit mention of "corpus" on all receipts, the tribunal found that the donors intended the funds to be capital contributions for the trust's objectives, not general donations. The ruling clarified that corpus includes capital contributions made with the intent to be held and utilized for the trust's purposes, and such receipts are exempt from tax. Consequently, the AO's treatment of the donations as general receipts was reversed, and the donations were directed to be treated as corpus donations, thereby exempting them from tax. The assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.