Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
ITAT upheld depreciation on solar power plants because documentary evidence showed purchase, installation, commissioning, power generation, invoicing and receipt of sale proceeds, and the Revenue failed to discredit that material. It also rejected the section 56(2)(viib) addition, holding that the assessee could adopt the DCF valuation method and that the Assessing Officer could not substitute NAV without identifying concrete defects in the independent valuation report. Brokerage on commodity derivatives was held outside section 194H, so the section 40(a)(ia) disallowance failed. The Tribunal also sustained the section 14A disallowance only up to exempt income, and quashed the section 153D-based assessment as void because the common approval was mechanical.
ITAT upheld depreciation on solar power plants because documentary evidence showed purchase, installation, commissioning, power generation, invoicing and receipt of sale proceeds, and the Revenue failed to discredit that material. It also rejected the section 56(2)(viib) addition, holding that the assessee could adopt the DCF valuation method and that the Assessing Officer could not substitute NAV without identifying concrete defects in the independent valuation report. Brokerage on commodity derivatives was held outside section 194H, so the section 40(a)(ia) disallowance failed. The Tribunal also sustained the section 14A disallowance only up to exempt income, and quashed the section 153D-based assessment as void because the common approval was mechanical.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.