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...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the Tribunal's and CIT(A)'s findings that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 54 in respect of the new residential property despite joint acquisition with a son-in-law, because the AO's 50% restriction was not substantiated and the amount of investment was undisputed. The Tribunal further upheld the cost of acquisition adopted by the assessee, accepting the valuation report and noting consistency with stamp duty valuation as of 01.04.2001, finding no contravention of the proviso to section 55(2)(b). Consequently the AO's adjustments were overturned and the impugned assessment was restored in favour of the assessee.
ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the Tribunal's and CIT(A)'s findings that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 54 in respect of the new residential property despite joint acquisition with a son-in-law, because the AO's 50% restriction was not substantiated and the amount of investment was undisputed. The Tribunal further upheld the cost of acquisition adopted by the assessee, accepting the valuation report and noting consistency with stamp duty valuation as of 01.04.2001, finding no contravention of the proviso to section 55(2)(b). Consequently the AO's adjustments were overturned and the impugned assessment was restored in favour of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.