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 allowed the assessee's claim for exemption under section 10(23C)(v) despite the failure to file the audit report within the time prescribed under section 139(1), holding that the statutory time limit for audit report submission is not mandatory for denial of exemption. The tribunal emphasized that receipts in the form of offerings to an institution wholly dedicated to religious purposes do not constitute taxable income. The assessee, being a government-controlled entity with accounts approved by the State Assembly, was presumed to have applied the receipts appropriately. Technical non-compliance was dispensed with to uphold fairness in taxation. Consequently, the reassessment orders computing assessable income were set aside, and the exemption under section 10(23C)(v) was granted in full, directing the assessing officer to give effect accordingly.
The ITAT allowed the assessee's claim for exemption under section 10(23C)(v) despite the failure to file the audit report within the time prescribed under section 139(1), holding that the statutory time limit for audit report submission is not mandatory for denial of exemption. The tribunal emphasized that receipts in the form of offerings to an institution wholly dedicated to religious purposes do not constitute taxable income. The assessee, being a government-controlled entity with accounts approved by the State Assembly, was presumed to have applied the receipts appropriately. Technical non-compliance was dispensed with to uphold fairness in taxation. Consequently, the reassessment orders computing assessable income were set aside, and the exemption under section 10(23C)(v) was granted in full, directing the assessing officer to give effect accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.