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 upholds CIT(A)'s deletion of penalty under section 271D, concluding that the A.O.'s and A.CIT's reliance on an asserted cash payment of Rs. 25 crores by the assessee to a third party for AY 2012-13 was erroneous. Tribunal finds absence of any evidentiary basis for actual cash receipt, negating contravention of section 269SS and precluding levy of penalty under section 271D. Consequently, CIT(A)'s deletion of the penalty is sustained and the Revenue's ground is rejected. The assessment and penalty orders insofar as they depend on the alleged cash transaction are annulled.
ITAT upholds CIT(A)'s deletion of penalty under section 271D, concluding that the A.O.'s and A.CIT's reliance on an asserted cash payment of Rs. 25 crores by the assessee to a third party for AY 2012-13 was erroneous. Tribunal finds absence of any evidentiary basis for actual cash receipt, negating contravention of section 269SS and precluding levy of penalty under section 271D. Consequently, CIT(A)'s deletion of the penalty is sustained and the Revenue's ground is rejected. The assessment and penalty orders insofar as they depend on the alleged cash transaction are annulled.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.