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...
Reopening under reassessment must stand or fall on the recorded reasons; where the basis was an alleged reduction in closing work in progress, the Court held that this did not disclose escapement of income because a lower closing work in progress would reduce profit rather than create taxable income. After the assessee pointed out this defect, the Assessing Officer could not sustain the notice by shifting to a new allegation of suppression of sales or other income. The consistent method of valuing closing work in progress had also not been unsettled earlier. The notice and the order rejecting objections were quashed.
Reopening under reassessment must stand or fall on the recorded reasons; where the basis was an alleged reduction in closing work in progress, the Court held that this did not disclose escapement of income because a lower closing work in progress would reduce profit rather than create taxable income. After the assessee pointed out this defect, the Assessing Officer could not sustain the notice by shifting to a new allegation of suppression of sales or other income. The consistent method of valuing closing work in progress had also not been unsettled earlier. The notice and the order rejecting objections were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.