Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is confined to investments that actually generated exempt income, while supported business expenses remain dedu...
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.