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" ?
The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s deletion of a protective addition under section 2(22)(e). The Tribunal accepted that Rs. 18.08 crore received from a group concern constituted contribution of funds for a collective project and was a bona fide business transaction rather than a distribution of profits. Noting that the assessee paid interest exceeding Rs.1 crore on the alleged loan and that similar factual matrices have been treated as business transactions under the CBDT example, the ITAT held the transaction qualified for exclusion under sub-clause (ii) of section 2(22)(e). Consequently, the amounts were not to be treated as deemed dividend.
The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s deletion of a protective addition under section 2(22)(e). The Tribunal accepted that Rs. 18.08 crore received from a group concern constituted contribution of funds for a collective project and was a bona fide business transaction rather than a distribution of profits. Noting that the assessee paid interest exceeding Rs.1 crore on the alleged loan and that similar factual matrices have been treated as business transactions under the CBDT example, the ITAT held the transaction qualified for exclusion under sub-clause (ii) of section 2(22)(e). Consequently, the amounts were not to be treated as deemed dividend.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.