Three Important Judgements On s. 80-IB(10), 37(1) And Transfer Pricing

Naresh T. Wadhwani vs. DCIT (ITAT Pune)

S. 80-IB(10)(c): Area of projected terrace (open to sky) is not liable to be included within the meaning of expression “built-up area”
The issue to be decided is as to whether the area of projected terrace (open to sky) is liable to be included within the meaning of expression “built-up area” contained in clause (c) of section 80IB(10) of the Act. (i) The controversy revolves around the condition prescribed in clause (c) of section 80IB(10) of the […]

 

DCIT vs. Insilco Ltd (ITAT Delhi)

If assessee has followed CUP method, it cannot argue at the appellate stage that TNMM should be followed even if TPO has for later years accepted TNMM and the Most Appropriate Method
(i) It is observed that the assessee applied CUP as the most appropriate method for benchmarking the international transactions undertaken by it. The assessee did not dispute before the TPO that the CUP was the most appropriate method. However, it was only during the course of first appellate proceedings that the assessee came out with […]

Praveen Saxena vs. JCIT (ITAT Delhi)

S. 37(1): Law on deductibility of expenditure incurred on legal fees to defend criminal proceedings explained

(i) The ratio of the decisions in CIT vs. Birla Brothers 82 ITR 166 (SC), CIT vs. Dhanrajgiri Raja Narsinghgiri (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC), CIT Vs. H. Hirjee (1953) 23 ITR 427 (SC) and CIT Vs. Chaman Lal & Brothers (1970) 77 ITR 383 (Del) can be summarized as follows. In the cases where […]