Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
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...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
