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...
Jurisdictional objections in reassessment, including a notice issued in the name of a deceased assessee and alleged procedural non-compliance, must be addressed before merits where they could invalidate the reassessment. Section 250(6) requires the appellate authority to identify each point for determination, record its decision and provide reasons; a general reference to the assessment order does not constitute ground-wise reasoned adjudication. The authority's power to set aside a best-judgment assessment does not remove this obligation. Jurisdictional and legal grounds should be decided through a speaking order before additions are examined on merits, which arise only if the reassessment is valid.
Jurisdictional objections in reassessment, including a notice issued in the name of a deceased assessee and alleged procedural non-compliance, must be addressed before merits where they could invalidate the reassessment. Section 250(6) requires the appellate authority to identify each point for determination, record its decision and provide reasons; a general reference to the assessment order does not constitute ground-wise reasoned adjudication. The authority's power to set aside a best-judgment assessment does not remove this obligation. Jurisdictional and legal grounds should be decided through a speaking order before additions are examined on merits, which arise only if the reassessment is valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.