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 directed deletion of additions made under s.69A, holding that undocumented loose paper found at a third party's residence could not sustain an unexplained income addition against the assessee. The Tribunal found the AO's reliance on unsubstantiated inference from initials and an audio recording insufficient: the seized paper was undated and thus presumptively related to the year of search (FY 2020-21/AY 2021-22), not the assessment year to which the additions were made; no cash or corroborative documents were seized from the assessee; no enquiries were pursued concerning running bills; and the audio had no nexus to the assessee. Accordingly, additions based on the seized entries were deleted and grounds 1-3 were allowed.
ITAT directed deletion of additions made under s.69A, holding that undocumented loose paper found at a third party's residence could not sustain an unexplained income addition against the assessee. The Tribunal found the AO's reliance on unsubstantiated inference from initials and an audio recording insufficient: the seized paper was undated and thus presumptively related to the year of search (FY 2020-21/AY 2021-22), not the assessment year to which the additions were made; no cash or corroborative documents were seized from the assessee; no enquiries were pursued concerning running bills; and the audio had no nexus to the assessee. Accordingly, additions based on the seized entries were deleted and grounds 1-3 were allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.