Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The ITAT upheld deletion of transfer pricing adjustments on captive power supplied to eligible manufacturing units for section 80-IA purposes, applying the Supreme Court principle that the relevant market value is the rate charged by the State Electricity Board or distribution company to industrial consumers, not the regulated or contracted surplus-power rate. It accepted the annual landed cost paid by the manufacturing units as the proper benchmark and rejected the Revenue's challenge. The Tribunal also sustained allocation of common head office expenses on the fixed-asset ratio, holding that the Revenue had followed the same method in earlier years and no change in facts or law justified a profitability-based allocation. All four Revenue appeals were dismissed.
The ITAT upheld deletion of transfer pricing adjustments on captive power supplied to eligible manufacturing units for section 80-IA purposes, applying the Supreme Court principle that the relevant market value is the rate charged by the State Electricity Board or distribution company to industrial consumers, not the regulated or contracted surplus-power rate. It accepted the annual landed cost paid by the manufacturing units as the proper benchmark and rejected the Revenue's challenge. The Tribunal also sustained allocation of common head office expenses on the fixed-asset ratio, holding that the Revenue had followed the same method in earlier years and no change in facts or law justified a profitability-based allocation. All four Revenue appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
