Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The ITAT upheld the assessed total income at Rs.1,10,70,33,060/- but partly allowed the assessee's appeal: it directed the AO to reduce an inadvertently offered additional income of Rs.1.14 crore (pertaining to AY 2010-11) from the assessment, and ordered deletion of a duplicate addition in AY 2010-11 which would have resulted in double taxation. The Tribunal affirmed that declared return income cannot be reduced. It allowed deduction of losses on forward commodity contracts as business expenditure under s.37(1) (held to be non-speculative hedging), and upheld the CIT(A)'s deletions disallowing revenue appeals against characterization of loan processing charges and foreign-currency hedging premium. Revenue's grounds were dismissed.
The ITAT upheld the assessed total income at Rs.1,10,70,33,060/- but partly allowed the assessee's appeal: it directed the AO to reduce an inadvertently offered additional income of Rs.1.14 crore (pertaining to AY 2010-11) from the assessment, and ordered deletion of a duplicate addition in AY 2010-11 which would have resulted in double taxation. The Tribunal affirmed that declared return income cannot be reduced. It allowed deduction of losses on forward commodity contracts as business expenditure under s.37(1) (held to be non-speculative hedging), and upheld the CIT(A)'s deletions disallowing revenue appeals against characterization of loan processing charges and foreign-currency hedging premium. Revenue's grounds were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
