Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Validity of reopening u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 - The Tribunal found that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer (AO) for reopening the assessment under section 147/148 were based on incorrect assumptions and information. Specifically, the AO erroneously believed that the assessee, an individual, had entered into a transaction of sale of immovable property, whereas the transaction was actually between two partnership firms. - The Tribunal noted that the AO should have issued a notice to the partnership firm involved instead of the individual assessee. - Consequently, entire proceedings u/s. 148 is held to be invalid.
Validity of reopening u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 - The Tribunal found that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer (AO) for reopening the assessment under section 147/148 were based on incorrect assumptions and information. Specifically, the AO erroneously believed that the assessee, an individual, had entered into a transaction of sale of immovable property, whereas the transaction was actually between two partnership firms. - The Tribunal noted that the AO should have issued a notice to the partnership firm involved instead of the individual assessee. - Consequently, entire proceedings u/s. 148 is held to be invalid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.