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...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
ITAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D. The Tribunal found the AO validly computed disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) on investments alone, notwithstanding absence of a proportional interest disallowance, and rejected the assessee's challenge to the AO's application of mind and alleged failure to record satisfaction. The Tribunal further held that, post-amendment, the assessee was obliged to compute suo moto disallowance even if no exempt income arose, which it failed to do. No infirmity was found in the CIT(A)'s order; the AO's computation under Rule 8D was affirmed and the assessee's appeal dismissed.
ITAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D. The Tribunal found the AO validly computed disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) on investments alone, notwithstanding absence of a proportional interest disallowance, and rejected the assessee's challenge to the AO's application of mind and alleged failure to record satisfaction. The Tribunal further held that, post-amendment, the assessee was obliged to compute suo moto disallowance even if no exempt income arose, which it failed to do. No infirmity was found in the CIT(A)'s order; the AO's computation under Rule 8D was affirmed and the assessee's appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
