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" ?
Revisionary review under section 263 was considered on whether the AO failed to inquire into the source of share capital and whether acceptance of a merchant banker valuation was erroneous. The tribunal found the AO had the investor's balance sheet before him, accepted the investor's creditworthiness, and that mere suspicion or association with a group did not amount to lack of inquiry. Inquiry into the source-of-source was not required, and the AO properly accepted a DCF valuation by a qualified merchant banker; revisionary interference was unwarranted and decision favoured the assessee.
Revisionary review under section 263 was considered on whether the AO failed to inquire into the source of share capital and whether acceptance of a merchant banker valuation was erroneous. The tribunal found the AO had the investor's balance sheet before him, accepted the investor's creditworthiness, and that mere suspicion or association with a group did not amount to lack of inquiry. Inquiry into the source-of-source was not required, and the AO properly accepted a DCF valuation by a qualified merchant banker; revisionary interference was unwarranted and decision favoured the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.