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 appeals, holding that the CIT(E) erroneously rejected the application for registration under s.12AB solely on account of an object clause suggesting potential activity outside India, having failed to consider multiple deed clauses evidencing domestic objects and beneficiaries. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(E)'s order and directed grant of registration under s.12AB. Consequentially, the ITAT also set aside the rejection of the s.80G application and directed the CIT to allow s.80G registration. The Tribunal found the impugned reasoning legally unsustainable and remitted the matter with directions to grant registrations in accordance with the deed and law.
The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeals, holding that the CIT(E) erroneously rejected the application for registration under s.12AB solely on account of an object clause suggesting potential activity outside India, having failed to consider multiple deed clauses evidencing domestic objects and beneficiaries. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(E)'s order and directed grant of registration under s.12AB. Consequentially, the ITAT also set aside the rejection of the s.80G application and directed the CIT to allow s.80G registration. The Tribunal found the impugned reasoning legally unsustainable and remitted the matter with directions to grant registrations in accordance with the deed and law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.