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 proceedings under ss. 271D and 271E were held unsustainable where the Revenue relied only on entries in seized papers belonging to third parties, without proving that the assessee actually accepted or repaid cash loans. The Tribunal held that such proceedings are penal in nature and independent of assessment proceedings, so the initial burden remained on the Revenue. That burden was not discharged because the documents were not shown to be the assessee's own records, no evidence proved utilisation or repayment, and the assessee's request for copies and cross-examination was denied. The penalties were deleted.
Penalty proceedings under ss. 271D and 271E were held unsustainable where the Revenue relied only on entries in seized papers belonging to third parties, without proving that the assessee actually accepted or repaid cash loans. The Tribunal held that such proceedings are penal in nature and independent of assessment proceedings, so the initial burden remained on the Revenue. That burden was not discharged because the documents were not shown to be the assessee's own records, no evidence proved utilisation or repayment, and the assessee's request for copies and cross-examination was denied. The penalties were deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
