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 allowed the appeal and directed the AO to compute surcharge at 15% on tax (not on tax-plus-surcharge) applicable to the assessee's income, rejecting the AO's imposition of 37%; the Tribunal held that "slab" references income, MMR refers to the highest income slab under the Finance Act, and surcharge rates derive from the Finance Act rather than sections 164/167B/2(29C) alone. The assessee, an AOP with total income exceeding Rs.5 crore (including dividend income) under the new tax regime, satisfies Finance Act conditions for 15% surcharge; consequential relief was ordered in favour of the assessee.
ITAT allowed the appeal and directed the AO to compute surcharge at 15% on tax (not on tax-plus-surcharge) applicable to the assessee's income, rejecting the AO's imposition of 37%; the Tribunal held that "slab" references income, MMR refers to the highest income slab under the Finance Act, and surcharge rates derive from the Finance Act rather than sections 164/167B/2(29C) alone. The assessee, an AOP with total income exceeding Rs.5 crore (including dividend income) under the new tax regime, satisfies Finance Act conditions for 15% surcharge; consequential relief was ordered in favour of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.