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 upheld the CIT(A)'s determination that the surplus from the sale of land is assessable under the head "capital gains" and not as business income, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal concurred with the finding that the properties were divested after a considerable lapse of time and that the assessee lacked intention to carry on a land-trading or real-estate business; consequently the AO's characterization of the transactions as an adventure in the nature of trade was rejected. The ITAT relied on the assessee's prior favorable orders for earlier assessment years as directly applicable and remitted action to the AO to assess the surplus as capital gains in accordance with law.
ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s determination that the surplus from the sale of land is assessable under the head "capital gains" and not as business income, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal concurred with the finding that the properties were divested after a considerable lapse of time and that the assessee lacked intention to carry on a land-trading or real-estate business; consequently the AO's characterization of the transactions as an adventure in the nature of trade was rejected. The ITAT relied on the assessee's prior favorable orders for earlier assessment years as directly applicable and remitted action to the AO to assess the surplus as capital gains in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.