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" ?
Addition under s. 56(2)(vii)(b) for alleged understatement of consideration in purchase of an immovable property was examined where the property was jointly purchased and the AO adopted stamp-duty value as on the year of registration. Since the allotment letter was issued and consideration was paid through banking channels in an earlier year, the relevant stamp-duty valuation had to be taken as on the date of allotment. On that date, the ready-reckoner value was lower than the actual consideration paid, eliminating any taxable difference; consequently, the addition made on the assessee's 50% share was held unsustainable and deleted. - ITAT
Addition under s. 56(2)(vii)(b) for alleged understatement of consideration in purchase of an immovable property was examined where the property was jointly purchased and the AO adopted stamp-duty value as on the year of registration. Since the allotment letter was issued and consideration was paid through banking channels in an earlier year, the relevant stamp-duty valuation had to be taken as on the date of allotment. On that date, the ready-reckoner value was lower than the actual consideration paid, eliminating any taxable difference; consequently, the addition made on the assessee's 50% share was held unsustainable and deleted. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.