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" ?
The dominant issue was whether a belated return for the second year disqualified the taxpayer from the 15% concessional rate under s.115BAB, warranting taxation at higher rates. The tribunal held that s.115BAB(7) mandates only that the option be exercised in the prescribed manner by filing Form 10-ID on or before the s.139(1) due date for the first year in which the option is first exercised; there is no statutory requirement that the return itself must be filed under s.139(1) to claim s.115BAB. Since a valid Form 10-ID option was exercised and accepted for the first year, the concessional rate continued for the subsequent year; the appellate order was reversed and relief granted. - ITAT
The dominant issue was whether a belated return for the second year disqualified the taxpayer from the 15% concessional rate under s.115BAB, warranting taxation at higher rates. The tribunal held that s.115BAB(7) mandates only that the option be exercised in the prescribed manner by filing Form 10-ID on or before the s.139(1) due date for the first year in which the option is first exercised; there is no statutory requirement that the return itself must be filed under s.139(1) to claim s.115BAB. Since a valid Form 10-ID option was exercised and accepted for the first year, the concessional rate continued for the subsequent year; the appellate order was reversed and relief granted. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.