Transfer pricing comparables and adjustments: Tribunal revisits loss-maker status, segmental comparability, working capital relief, and risk allocatio...
Business expenditure disallowance failed where commission, related-party salary and promotion payments were supported by records and inquiry was inade...
A reassessment cannot be sustained where the deduction claim was specifically examined and accepted in the original scrutiny assessment, because reopening on the same material is a mere change of opinion, even within four years. The recorded reasons also failed on merits: the proposed set-off of ineligible-unit losses before allowing the deduction was contrary to the Supreme Court's ruling in Yokogawa India Ltd., the foreign-exchange realisation condition was not applicable for the relevant year, and the objection that the claim was not made in the designated schedule was untenable because the claim was disclosed and explained during assessment. The notice, objection order, draft assessment order and consequential proceedings were quashed.
A reassessment cannot be sustained where the deduction claim was specifically examined and accepted in the original scrutiny assessment, because reopening on the same material is a mere change of opinion, even within four years. The recorded reasons also failed on merits: the proposed set-off of ineligible-unit losses before allowing the deduction was contrary to the Supreme Court's ruling in Yokogawa India Ltd., the foreign-exchange realisation condition was not applicable for the relevant year, and the objection that the claim was not made in the designated schedule was untenable because the claim was disclosed and explained during assessment. The notice, objection order, draft assessment order and consequential proceedings were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
