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...
Income or loss arising from assets transferred without consideration to a spouse was held to fall within section 64(1)(iv) where the Department failed to show consideration or an agreement to live apart. The Tribunal applied the principle that clubbing extends to income or loss indirectly arising from the transferred asset, so the spouse's derivative trading loss could be considered in the assessee's hands if a nexus with the gifted funds existed. The view that the loss was the spouse's independent trading loss was rejected. The matter was remitted only for verification of the quantum of loss attributable to the gifted funds.
Income or loss arising from assets transferred without consideration to a spouse was held to fall within section 64(1)(iv) where the Department failed to show consideration or an agreement to live apart. The Tribunal applied the principle that clubbing extends to income or loss indirectly arising from the transferred asset, so the spouse's derivative trading loss could be considered in the assessee's hands if a nexus with the gifted funds existed. The view that the loss was the spouse's independent trading loss was rejected. The matter was remitted only for verification of the quantum of loss attributable to the gifted funds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.