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...
Validity of order passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission [ITSC] u/s 245D(4) - proof of procedural error committed by the ITSC or any error with regard to the decision making process - full and true disclosure - learned Single Judge has set aside the order of ITSC - If a very rigid approach is taken in this regard, then the very purpose of enacting Sub-Section (6) of Section 245D of the Act would lose its purpose. In any event, we find that there is no error in the decision making process and as pointed out, we are not expected to substitute the decision of the ITSC, which has taken note of the conduct of the assessee, who was in the spirit of settlement subject to conditions - we are of the view that the order passed in the said writ petition calls for interference. - HC
Validity of order passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission [ITSC] u/s 245D(4) - proof of procedural error committed by the ITSC or any error with regard to the decision making process - full and true disclosure - learned Single Judge has set aside the order of ITSC - If a very rigid approach is taken in this regard, then the very purpose of enacting Sub-Section (6) of Section 245D of the Act would lose its purpose. In any event, we find that there is no error in the decision making process and as pointed out, we are not expected to substitute the decision of the ITSC, which has taken note of the conduct of the assessee, who was in the spirit of settlement subject to conditions - we are of the view that the order passed in the said writ petition calls for interference. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
