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...
ITAT deleted an addition under section 68 where cash deposits were made in a bank account standing in the name of a separately assessed trust, holding that the account did not belong to the assessee but to Deepak Gupta Education Trust. The assessee's role as authorised signatory, together with the affidavit and trust records, showed only representative operation of the account. In the absence of corroborative material establishing beneficial ownership or that the deposits were the assessee's undisclosed income, PAN linkage and signatory status alone were insufficient to sustain the addition in his hands. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, while the Tribunal made no finding on any possible addition in the hands of the trust.
ITAT deleted an addition under section 68 where cash deposits were made in a bank account standing in the name of a separately assessed trust, holding that the account did not belong to the assessee but to Deepak Gupta Education Trust. The assessee's role as authorised signatory, together with the affidavit and trust records, showed only representative operation of the account. In the absence of corroborative material establishing beneficial ownership or that the deposits were the assessee's undisclosed income, PAN linkage and signatory status alone were insufficient to sustain the addition in his hands. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, while the Tribunal made no finding on any possible addition in the hands of the trust.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.