Approved gratuity fund provisions remain deductible despite general actual-payment requirements, preventing revision of the allowed gratuity deduction...
Verification of intangible software expenditure and duplicated disallowances requires record-based reassessment before depreciation and income computa...
Cash receipt aggregation requires a single transaction, event or occasion; separate partner capital contributions cannot attract cash-receipt penaltie...
Page of 4923
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 98455 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 17(5)(d) restricts apportionment and blocking of credit solely in relation to goods or services used for construction of immovable property; it therefore does not apply to mere transfer of leasehold rights where no construction activity is shown, and such application is a non-application of mind. Section 74(1) may be invoked only where input tax credit was wrongly availed or utilised by reason of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression; absent material establishing those elements and where inadvertent ITC use was reversed and tax discharged, a s.74(1) notice is without jurisdiction and relief ensues.
Section 17(5)(d) restricts apportionment and blocking of credit solely in relation to goods or services used for construction of immovable property; it therefore does not apply to mere transfer of leasehold rights where no construction activity is shown, and such application is a non-application of mind. Section 74(1) may be invoked only where input tax credit was wrongly availed or utilised by reason of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression; absent material establishing those elements and where inadvertent ITC use was reversed and tax discharged, a s.74(1) notice is without jurisdiction and relief ensues.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
