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...
Condonation of delay filling Revision u/s 264 - refund of the FBT return - Powers conferred under Section 264 of the Act are very wide. Commissioner is bound to apply his mind to the question whether Petitioner's income was taxable and to what extent. - Petitioner having paid the tax and surcharge and the penalty with interest, amount of undisclosed income cannot be included in the income of the declarant/petitioner. Therefore, in our view, Commissioner should have exercised his power under Section 264 of the Act and decide the matter on merits. - HC
Condonation of delay filling Revision u/s 264 - refund of the FBT return - Powers conferred under Section 264 of the Act are very wide. Commissioner is bound to apply his mind to the question whether Petitioner's income was taxable and to what extent. - Petitioner having paid the tax and surcharge and the penalty with interest, amount of undisclosed income cannot be included in the income of the declarant/petitioner. Therefore, in our view, Commissioner should have exercised his power under Section 264 of the Act and decide the matter on merits. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
