Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Rectification u/s 154 - Transfer pricing adjustments - The assessee carried the matter on appeal to the Tribunal and once again, the assessee never raised any contention with regard to the validity of the notice dated 28.03.2006. Thus, considering this factual situation, we are of the clear view that the present attempt of the assessee is not tenable and accordingly rejected. - The assessment order dated 28.02.2006 is an order u/s 143(3) and not an order u/s 92C(3) of the Act. - The argument of the assessee before us is that the Assessing Officer has exercised jurisdiction u/s 92C(3) and the TPO parallely cannot exercise his power u/s92CA. On facts, the assessee is wrong. - HC
Rectification u/s 154 - Transfer pricing adjustments - The assessee carried the matter on appeal to the Tribunal and once again, the assessee never raised any contention with regard to the validity of the notice dated 28.03.2006. Thus, considering this factual situation, we are of the clear view that the present attempt of the assessee is not tenable and accordingly rejected. - The assessment order dated 28.02.2006 is an order u/s 143(3) and not an order u/s 92C(3) of the Act. - The argument of the assessee before us is that the Assessing Officer has exercised jurisdiction u/s 92C(3) and the TPO parallely cannot exercise his power u/s92CA. On facts, the assessee is wrong. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
