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...
Recording clear satisfaction in the assessment order was treated as a jurisdictional requirement before penalty for alleged cash receipts could be initiated; a bare reference to penalty proceedings was insufficient. The alleged contravention also had to be proved transaction-wise with cogent independent evidence identifying the payer, payee, amount, date and threshold breach, and seized data or estimated income alone were not enough in quasi-criminal penalty proceedings. The levy was further found unreasonable where the assessee had disclosed additional income and tax was already paid, so the penalties were deleted for want of jurisdiction and proof.
Recording clear satisfaction in the assessment order was treated as a jurisdictional requirement before penalty for alleged cash receipts could be initiated; a bare reference to penalty proceedings was insufficient. The alleged contravention also had to be proved transaction-wise with cogent independent evidence identifying the payer, payee, amount, date and threshold breach, and seized data or estimated income alone were not enough in quasi-criminal penalty proceedings. The levy was further found unreasonable where the assessee had disclosed additional income and tax was already paid, so the penalties were deleted for want of jurisdiction and proof.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.