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 allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty under s.271(1)(c). The Tribunal found that the assessee filed a revised return on 30.09.2011 within the prescribed time, declaring the true and correct income; such declaration could not be treated as unaccounted income or as concealment of particulars. The assessment by the AO was based on speculative estimation of business profits and could not convert a timely revised disclosure into concealment. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty. Consequently, the levy of penalty under s.271(1)(c) was quashed and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
ITAT allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty under s.271(1)(c). The Tribunal found that the assessee filed a revised return on 30.09.2011 within the prescribed time, declaring the true and correct income; such declaration could not be treated as unaccounted income or as concealment of particulars. The assessment by the AO was based on speculative estimation of business profits and could not convert a timely revised disclosure into concealment. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty. Consequently, the levy of penalty under s.271(1)(c) was quashed and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
