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" ?
ITAT affirmed CIT(A) and dismissed the revenue's appeal, holding that under Rule 11UA(2) the assessee had statutory option to adopt either NAV or DCF for valuation of unquoted equity shares for s.56(2)(viib); once the assessee validly exercised the option and furnished a merchant banker's DCF valuation, the AO lacked jurisdiction to unilaterally alter the valuation method. The AO's rejection of the valuation without obtaining an alternative valuation from an authorized valuer under Rule 11UA(2) was impermissible. Absent any admissible contrary valuation, the addition was correctly deleted and the assessment adjustment was reversed in favour of the assessee; appeal by the revenue dismissed.
ITAT affirmed CIT(A) and dismissed the revenue's appeal, holding that under Rule 11UA(2) the assessee had statutory option to adopt either NAV or DCF for valuation of unquoted equity shares for s.56(2)(viib); once the assessee validly exercised the option and furnished a merchant banker's DCF valuation, the AO lacked jurisdiction to unilaterally alter the valuation method. The AO's rejection of the valuation without obtaining an alternative valuation from an authorized valuer under Rule 11UA(2) was impermissible. Absent any admissible contrary valuation, the addition was correctly deleted and the assessment adjustment was reversed in favour of the assessee; appeal by the revenue dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.