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" ?
Grant-in-aid/subsidy received from the Government under a rehabilitation scheme was examined to determine whether it constituted a revenue receipt or a capital receipt. Applying the "purpose test", the financial assistance was held to be intended predominantly to rehabilitate the loss-making assessee by pulling it out of financial stringency, with the funds earmarked primarily for clearing loan liabilities. Performance-linked conditions were treated as monitoring mechanisms to ensure proper utilisation of rehabilitation assistance, not as indicators of a revenue character. Even assuming some performance objective, the dominant purpose of rehabilitation prevailed. Accordingly, the receipt was held to be a capital receipt not chargeable as revenue income, and the issue was decided against the revenue. - HC
Grant-in-aid/subsidy received from the Government under a rehabilitation scheme was examined to determine whether it constituted a revenue receipt or a capital receipt. Applying the "purpose test", the financial assistance was held to be intended predominantly to rehabilitate the loss-making assessee by pulling it out of financial stringency, with the funds earmarked primarily for clearing loan liabilities. Performance-linked conditions were treated as monitoring mechanisms to ensure proper utilisation of rehabilitation assistance, not as indicators of a revenue character. Even assuming some performance objective, the dominant purpose of rehabilitation prevailed. Accordingly, the receipt was held to be a capital receipt not chargeable as revenue income, and the issue was decided against the revenue. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.