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 affirmed that the AO validly invoked s.154 to correct an apparent error and increase the domestic company tax rate from 29% to 30% where the assessee was incorporated on 02.08.2016 and therefore had no turnover in PY 2014-15; Paragraph E( i ) of the First Schedule to the Finance Act, 2017 (29% concessional rate) applies only to domestic companies existing in PY 2014-15 with turnover ≤ Rs.5 crore, whereas the assessee falls within clause (ii) prescribing 30%. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s conclusion and dismissed the assessee's grounds, rejecting the analogy to prior-year turnover and finding the s.143(3) figure of 29% to be an obvious record error corrected lawfully under s.154.
ITAT affirmed that the AO validly invoked s.154 to correct an apparent error and increase the domestic company tax rate from 29% to 30% where the assessee was incorporated on 02.08.2016 and therefore had no turnover in PY 2014-15; Paragraph E( i ) of the First Schedule to the Finance Act, 2017 (29% concessional rate) applies only to domestic companies existing in PY 2014-15 with turnover ≤ Rs.5 crore, whereas the assessee falls within clause (ii) prescribing 30%. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s conclusion and dismissed the assessee's grounds, rejecting the analogy to prior-year turnover and finding the s.143(3) figure of 29% to be an obvious record error corrected lawfully under s.154.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
