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 held that the notice issued under s.148 was barred by limitation and the reassessment proceedings were quashed. The Tribunal found the AO lacked books, documents or evidence showing that the alleged escaped income met the twin conditions of s.149(1)(b): (i) income escaping assessment and (ii) such income being represented in the form of an asset; a disallowance of expenditure could not be treated as representation in the form of an asset. The Tribunal treated the post-relevant-date amendment to s.149(1)(b) as having prospective effect. Consequently the s.148 notice dated 23-4-2021 was invalid, reassessment set aside and the assessee's cross-objection ground allowed.
ITAT held that the notice issued under s.148 was barred by limitation and the reassessment proceedings were quashed. The Tribunal found the AO lacked books, documents or evidence showing that the alleged escaped income met the twin conditions of s.149(1)(b): (i) income escaping assessment and (ii) such income being represented in the form of an asset; a disallowance of expenditure could not be treated as representation in the form of an asset. The Tribunal treated the post-relevant-date amendment to s.149(1)(b) as having prospective effect. Consequently the s.148 notice dated 23-4-2021 was invalid, reassessment set aside and the assessee's cross-objection ground allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.