Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
661 to 680 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT held that interest on fixed deposits and related receipts were taxable as income from other sources because the maintenance clauses in the sale deed and co-developer agreement did not create diversion of income by overriding title; the funds and accrued interest remained under the assessee's control, so the use of interest for maintenance was only application of income after accrual. It also held that maintenance and administrative did not have the direct and exclusive nexus required for deduction against such interest income, so the disallowance was sustained. However, the Tribunal accepted that a claim under section 80P(2)(d) could not be denied merely because the return was filed under section 139(4), and directed allowance after hearing.
ITAT held that interest on fixed deposits and related receipts were taxable as income from other sources because the maintenance clauses in the sale deed and co-developer agreement did not create diversion of income by overriding title; the funds and accrued interest remained under the assessee's control, so the use of interest for maintenance was only application of income after accrual. It also held that maintenance and administrative did not have the direct and exclusive nexus required for deduction against such interest income, so the disallowance was sustained. However, the Tribunal accepted that a claim under section 80P(2)(d) could not be denied merely because the return was filed under section 139(4), and directed allowance after hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.