Transfer pricing comparables and adjustments: Tribunal revisits loss-maker status, segmental comparability, working capital relief, and risk allocatio...
Business expenditure disallowance failed where commission, related-party salary and promotion payments were supported by records and inquiry was inade...
ITAT held that deduction under section 54F could not be denied merely because the residential house was purchased from close relatives or because the Revenue suspected a colourable device. The sale of shares and purchase of the flat were supported by contemporaneous material, including demat records, a registered purchase agreement, developer confirmation, and post-purchase utility records in the assessee's name; the use of a power of attorney for execution of the deed was also not questioned by the registering authority. As the transactions remained undislodged by cogent evidence, the Tribunal treated the arrangement as permissible tax planning within the legal framework and directed deletion of the addition.
ITAT held that deduction under section 54F could not be denied merely because the residential house was purchased from close relatives or because the Revenue suspected a colourable device. The sale of shares and purchase of the flat were supported by contemporaneous material, including demat records, a registered purchase agreement, developer confirmation, and post-purchase utility records in the assessee's name; the use of a power of attorney for execution of the deed was also not questioned by the registering authority. As the transactions remained undislodged by cogent evidence, the Tribunal treated the arrangement as permissible tax planning within the legal framework and directed deletion of the addition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
