Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
ITAT held that the revision u/s 263 was unsustainable and set aside the PCIT's order, affirming the AO's allowance of marketing-research, recruitment and retainership fees as deductible revenue expenditure u/s 37(1). The Tribunal found s.35D inapplicable because the expenditures were not incurred pre-commencement nor in relation to expansion/new unit, so they could not be amortised under s.35D. Applying the two-views doctrine, ITAT concluded the AO's prima facie satisfaction after enquiry and documentary scrutiny was not shown to be legally erroneous; mere disagreement by the PCIT did not confer jurisdiction to revise the assessment. Decision in favour of the assessee.
ITAT held that the revision u/s 263 was unsustainable and set aside the PCIT's order, affirming the AO's allowance of marketing-research, recruitment and retainership fees as deductible revenue expenditure u/s 37(1). The Tribunal found s.35D inapplicable because the expenditures were not incurred pre-commencement nor in relation to expansion/new unit, so they could not be amortised under s.35D. Applying the two-views doctrine, ITAT concluded the AO's prima facie satisfaction after enquiry and documentary scrutiny was not shown to be legally erroneous; mere disagreement by the PCIT did not confer jurisdiction to revise the assessment. Decision in favour of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
