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...
Unwinding allegedly fraudulent and void transactions in oppression and mismanagement proceedings does not depend on prior consent where the pleadings seek to expose sham, circuitous arrangements and their true effect. The Tribunal held that the earlier appellate order did not make mutual agreement an inflexible precondition, and that the proviso governing termination or modification of subsisting third-party agreements did not bar wider relief when illegality was alleged. Detailed pleadings, annexures and investigative materials were sufficient to require merits examination. Election, estoppel and approbate-reprobate could not be used to shut out scrutiny of transactions said to bypass binding regulatory directions, which were treated as statutory and enforceable.
Unwinding allegedly fraudulent and void transactions in oppression and mismanagement proceedings does not depend on prior consent where the pleadings seek to expose sham, circuitous arrangements and their true effect. The Tribunal held that the earlier appellate order did not make mutual agreement an inflexible precondition, and that the proviso governing termination or modification of subsisting third-party agreements did not bar wider relief when illegality was alleged. Detailed pleadings, annexures and investigative materials were sufficient to require merits examination. Election, estoppel and approbate-reprobate could not be used to shut out scrutiny of transactions said to bypass binding regulatory directions, which were treated as statutory and enforceable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
