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...
In rectification proceedings, an adverse variation withdrawing relief could not be made ex parte: the Tribunal noted that no notice was issued and that the mandatory opportunity of hearing under section 154(3) was not complied with, so the rectification was void ab initio and set aside. The Tribunal also held that section 154 is confined to correcting a patent mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to reconsider or reverse a concluded appellate view; where the earlier appellate decision had already favoured the assessee, the later rectification amounted to an impermissible review rather than rectification. The appeal was allowed and the impugned rectification was held unsustainable.
In rectification proceedings, an adverse variation withdrawing relief could not be made ex parte: the Tribunal noted that no notice was issued and that the mandatory opportunity of hearing under section 154(3) was not complied with, so the rectification was void ab initio and set aside. The Tribunal also held that section 154 is confined to correcting a patent mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to reconsider or reverse a concluded appellate view; where the earlier appellate decision had already favoured the assessee, the later rectification amounted to an impermissible review rather than rectification. The appeal was allowed and the impugned rectification was held unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
