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...
Benami transaction - availability of joint family property or income - joint family acquisition - Purchase of property in the name of wife (Mrs. A) - Presumption of joint family income and joint family funds - The statute would presume that the purchase was for the benefit of Wife and it was not a benami purchase. Of-course, the presumption is rebuttable. To rebut the statutory presumption, there must be firm foundation in pleadings as well as evidence. In the pleadings, there is no averment that Umayal Ammal held the property for the benefit of the joint family members. - HC
Benami transaction - availability of joint family property or income - joint family acquisition - Purchase of property in the name of wife (Mrs. A) - Presumption of joint family income and joint family funds - The statute would presume that the purchase was for the benefit of Wife and it was not a benami purchase. Of-course, the presumption is rebuttable. To rebut the statutory presumption, there must be firm foundation in pleadings as well as evidence. In the pleadings, there is no averment that Umayal Ammal held the property for the benefit of the joint family members. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
