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" ?
Reopening of assessment under section 147 was quashed because the Assessing Officer lacked tangible information to form a belief that income had escaped assessment; the Tribunal found the AO had misread binding precedent treating amounts under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act as accretions to land value (compensation) rather than ordinary 'income from other sources'. The Tribunal also upheld the sanction notation by the Joint Commissioner as valid despite concise wording, finding no absence of application of mind. Result: sanction valid but reopening invalid; appeal allowed.
Reopening of assessment under section 147 was quashed because the Assessing Officer lacked tangible information to form a belief that income had escaped assessment; the Tribunal found the AO had misread binding precedent treating amounts under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act as accretions to land value (compensation) rather than ordinary 'income from other sources'. The Tribunal also upheld the sanction notation by the Joint Commissioner as valid despite concise wording, finding no absence of application of mind. Result: sanction valid but reopening invalid; appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.