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" ?
HC upheld ITAT's dismissal of Revenue's appeals concerning deduction under Section 10A for AYs 2007-08 and 2008-09. It affirmed the CIT(A)'s finding that the AO was not justified in reallocating royalty and management fee expenses, incurred by non-10A units and paid to an overseas group entity, to 10A-eligible captive units based on revenue apportionment. The HC held that such expenses, linked to third-party revenue and services of group entities, could not be attributed to captive 10A units, and that additional allocation of legal and professional expenses was unwarranted. Consequently, disallowance of Section 10A deduction was rightly deleted and Revenue's appeals were dismissed.
HC upheld ITAT's dismissal of Revenue's appeals concerning deduction under Section 10A for AYs 2007-08 and 2008-09. It affirmed the CIT(A)'s finding that the AO was not justified in reallocating royalty and management fee expenses, incurred by non-10A units and paid to an overseas group entity, to 10A-eligible captive units based on revenue apportionment. The HC held that such expenses, linked to third-party revenue and services of group entities, could not be attributed to captive 10A units, and that additional allocation of legal and professional expenses was unwarranted. Consequently, disallowance of Section 10A deduction was rightly deleted and Revenue's appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
