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 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Addition under s.69C for alleged bogus purchases was unsustainable because the precondition for s.69C is proof of a genuinely incurred expenditure whose source remains unexplained. Since the assessee's books were not rejected under s.145(3), the purchases were recorded in regular books, and bank statements evidenced sufficient balances and payments, the source of the purchase expenditure was not in dispute. Consequently, s.69C could not be invoked, and the estimated disallowance/profit element addition at 12.5% of purchase value was deleted; the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Addition under s.69C for alleged bogus purchases was unsustainable because the precondition for s.69C is proof of a genuinely incurred expenditure whose source remains unexplained. Since the assessee's books were not rejected under s.145(3), the purchases were recorded in regular books, and bank statements evidenced sufficient balances and payments, the source of the purchase expenditure was not in dispute. Consequently, s.69C could not be invoked, and the estimated disallowance/profit element addition at 12.5% of purchase value was deleted; the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.