Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Cross country pipeline classification and ITC entitlement: pipelines outside factory treated as immovable, ITC disallowed under Section 17 restriction...
Primary issue was whether assets received under a scheme of demerger attracted deemed income u/s 56(2)(x) because the demerger allegedly violated Section 2(19AA) and the swap ratio/valuation contravened Rule 11UA. Tribunal held Section 2(19AA)(iv) mandates proportionate share allotment only, Rule 11UA cannot be read into Section 2(19AA), the registered valuer's computation was reasonable and the scheme complied with Section 2(19AA) read with Section 47(vi); consequence: addition u/s 56(2)(x) deleted. Separately, payment under an unregistered MOU was not a "specified agreement" attracting TDS u/s 194IC; consequence: no TDS liability. - ITAT
Primary issue was whether assets received under a scheme of demerger attracted deemed income u/s 56(2)(x) because the demerger allegedly violated Section 2(19AA) and the swap ratio/valuation contravened Rule 11UA. Tribunal held Section 2(19AA)(iv) mandates proportionate share allotment only, Rule 11UA cannot be read into Section 2(19AA), the registered valuer's computation was reasonable and the scheme complied with Section 2(19AA) read with Section 47(vi); consequence: addition u/s 56(2)(x) deleted. Separately, payment under an unregistered MOU was not a "specified agreement" attracting TDS u/s 194IC; consequence: no TDS liability. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.