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...
Writ jurisdiction against a reassessment order was declined because the Court found no abject denial of natural justice. A show cause notice under section 148 had been issued, the assessee filed replies raising legal and merits-based objections, the Department satisfactorily explained supply of documents with the notice, and the Assessing Authority considered the reply before finalising the assessment. In these circumstances, the availability of an efficacious statutory appeal under the Act barred interference under Article 226. The assessee was therefore required to pursue the assessment challenge before the appellate forum.
Writ jurisdiction against a reassessment order was declined because the Court found no abject denial of natural justice. A show cause notice under section 148 had been issued, the assessee filed replies raising legal and merits-based objections, the Department satisfactorily explained supply of documents with the notice, and the Assessing Authority considered the reply before finalising the assessment. In these circumstances, the availability of an efficacious statutory appeal under the Act barred interference under Article 226. The assessee was therefore required to pursue the assessment challenge before the appellate forum.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
