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 compensation paid by the assessee to the first purchaser for cancellation of an agreement to sale qualifies as cost of improvement or expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with the transfer of the capital asset under Section 48 of the Act. The tribunal rejected the Revenue's contention that such compensation does not constitute cost of improvement merely because no physical enhancement was made to the property. It was observed that improvement includes any act that enhances the asset's value, including clearing title and legal encumbrances. The payment was deemed necessary to enable a sale free from litigation, thereby increasing the asset's marketability and value. Consequently, the compensation was held to be deductible from the sale consideration for capital gains computation, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
The ITAT held that compensation paid by the assessee to the first purchaser for cancellation of an agreement to sale qualifies as cost of improvement or expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with the transfer of the capital asset under Section 48 of the Act. The tribunal rejected the Revenue's contention that such compensation does not constitute cost of improvement merely because no physical enhancement was made to the property. It was observed that improvement includes any act that enhances the asset's value, including clearing title and legal encumbrances. The payment was deemed necessary to enable a sale free from litigation, thereby increasing the asset's marketability and value. Consequently, the compensation was held to be deductible from the sale consideration for capital gains computation, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.