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 affirmed that the narrower construction urged by the assessee is untenable and that payments made under a specified agreement involving transfer of leasehold development rights fall within the ambit of s.194IC, thereby attracting TDS and consequential liability under s.201(1)/(1A). The Tribunal rejected the contention that the transferor was outside the definition of "specified agreement" and held the beneficial intent of sub-s.5A favours treating such transfers as taxable. The Tribunal found no evidence that the transferor had offered the impugned receipts to tax and remitted the matter to the AO to verify whether the transferor declared the payments in AY 2024-25; appeal otherwise dismissed.
ITAT affirmed that the narrower construction urged by the assessee is untenable and that payments made under a specified agreement involving transfer of leasehold development rights fall within the ambit of s.194IC, thereby attracting TDS and consequential liability under s.201(1)/(1A). The Tribunal rejected the contention that the transferor was outside the definition of "specified agreement" and held the beneficial intent of sub-s.5A favours treating such transfers as taxable. The Tribunal found no evidence that the transferor had offered the impugned receipts to tax and remitted the matter to the AO to verify whether the transferor declared the payments in AY 2024-25; appeal otherwise dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.