Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 96136 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT applied consistent prior-year treatment to delete the proportionate disallowance under section 80IA for telecom services, holding that the assessee's segmental allocation issue could not justify the adjustment. It also followed the Delhi High Court in the assessee's own case to hold that telecom data transmission payments to non-resident operators were not royalty, so the section 40(a)(i) disallowance for alleged non-deduction of tax was not sustainable under the treaty. The section 40(a)(ia) issue was sent back for verification because the amount had already been disallowed suo motu. On transfer pricing, the Tribunal accepted the limited risk model as consistently applied and sustained adjustment only to the extent of the shortfall in the agreed compensation.
ITAT applied consistent prior-year treatment to delete the proportionate disallowance under section 80IA for telecom services, holding that the assessee's segmental allocation issue could not justify the adjustment. It also followed the Delhi High Court in the assessee's own case to hold that telecom data transmission payments to non-resident operators were not royalty, so the section 40(a)(i) disallowance for alleged non-deduction of tax was not sustainable under the treaty. The section 40(a)(ia) issue was sent back for verification because the amount had already been disallowed suo motu. On transfer pricing, the Tribunal accepted the limited risk model as consistently applied and sustained adjustment only to the extent of the shortfall in the agreed compensation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.