Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1641 to 1660 of 96508 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.