Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held not exigible on the addition relating to transfer of tenancy rights because the addition rested on the deeming fiction in section 50C, and the same reasoning used to delete penalty on the property transfer addition applied equally. Penalty was also deleted on the fixed deposit interest addition because the interest formed part of maturity proceeds, the investment was not disputed, and mere acceptance of the addition did not automatically establish concealment. The Tribunal held that each addition must be examined on its own facts before penalty can be imposed.
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held not exigible on the addition relating to transfer of tenancy rights because the addition rested on the deeming fiction in section 50C, and the same reasoning used to delete penalty on the property transfer addition applied equally. Penalty was also deleted on the fixed deposit interest addition because the interest formed part of maturity proceeds, the investment was not disputed, and mere acceptance of the addition did not automatically establish concealment. The Tribunal held that each addition must be examined on its own facts before penalty can be imposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.