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...
Jurisdiction under section 124 was rejected because the assessment had been authorised under section 120(4)(b), notices were issued by the Additional Commissioner, and no timely objection was raised; the jurisdictional ground was admitted but dismissed on merits. The India-Germany DDT treaty claim was remitted for limited verification of treaty documents and eligibility under the binding High Court ruling. Provisions for liquidated damages and warranty were treated as allowable in principle but 50% disallowed for excess quantification, with directions to prevent double taxation on later reversal or utilisation. The section 145A adjustment and commission disallowance were deleted, while actuarially valued employee benefit provisions were upheld.
Jurisdiction under section 124 was rejected because the assessment had been authorised under section 120(4)(b), notices were issued by the Additional Commissioner, and no timely objection was raised; the jurisdictional ground was admitted but dismissed on merits. The India-Germany DDT treaty claim was remitted for limited verification of treaty documents and eligibility under the binding High Court ruling. Provisions for liquidated damages and warranty were treated as allowable in principle but 50% disallowed for excess quantification, with directions to prevent double taxation on later reversal or utilisation. The section 145A adjustment and commission disallowance were deleted, while actuarially valued employee benefit provisions were upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.