PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Interest paid under s.201(1A) for delayed TDS remittance was held not compensatory and hence not deductible as business expenditure under s.37(1), following binding precedent; the disallowance was sustained. Payments to a foreign expert were held to exhibit employer-employee attributes; GST treatment was irrelevant, and the amounts were treated as salary requiring TDS under s.192, so disallowance under s.40(a)(i) for non-deduction was upheld. Disallowance of head-office staff reimbursements under s.44DA lacked a clear adjudication and was remitted to the AO for fresh decision with opportunity of hearing. Bank/performance guarantee charges were not "commission or brokerage" absent a principal-agent relationship, so disallowance under s.40(a) was deleted. Challenge to mere initiation of penalty under s.270A was held non-maintainable. - ITAT
Interest paid under s.201(1A) for delayed TDS remittance was held not compensatory and hence not deductible as business expenditure under s.37(1), following binding precedent; the disallowance was sustained. Payments to a foreign expert were held to exhibit employer-employee attributes; GST treatment was irrelevant, and the amounts were treated as salary requiring TDS under s.192, so disallowance under s.40(a)(i) for non-deduction was upheld. Disallowance of head-office staff reimbursements under s.44DA lacked a clear adjudication and was remitted to the AO for fresh decision with opportunity of hearing. Bank/performance guarantee charges were not "commission or brokerage" absent a principal-agent relationship, so disallowance under s.40(a) was deleted. Challenge to mere initiation of penalty under s.270A was held non-maintainable. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.