Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Bogus purchase additions under section 69C were discussed in the context of whether the assessee had discharged the burden of proving genuineness; the note states that purchase invoices, supplier ledgers, transport receipts, banking records and regular books supported the transactions, and that a mere reversal of input tax credit did not by itself establish non-genuine purchases. It also addresses reassessment under section 148, stating that notice and the section 148A(d) order were not in accordance with law where the reopening was based on DGGI/Insight information, the material was not supplied to the assessee, and no independent application of mind was shown. The addition and reopening are described as unsustainable on those facts.
Bogus purchase additions under section 69C were discussed in the context of whether the assessee had discharged the burden of proving genuineness; the note states that purchase invoices, supplier ledgers, transport receipts, banking records and regular books supported the transactions, and that a mere reversal of input tax credit did not by itself establish non-genuine purchases. It also addresses reassessment under section 148, stating that notice and the section 148A(d) order were not in accordance with law where the reopening was based on DGGI/Insight information, the material was not supplied to the assessee, and no independent application of mind was shown. The addition and reopening are described as unsustainable on those facts.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.