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...
Addition u/s 56(2)(viib) r.w.r 11UA - excess premium charged - issuance of preference shares to the director/ex-director of the assessee company - The ITAT held that there was no justification for the A.O to have triggered the deeming provisions of Section 56(2)(viib) i.e a counter tax evasion provision - The ITAT addressed the valuation dispute, emphasizing the distinction between preference shares and equity shares, particularly focusing on their characteristics and the applicable methods for determining their FMV. It was noted that preference shares, due to their nature, could not be valued using the same method as equity shares. - Matter restored back for redetermine the FMV of the subject preference shares subject to the tribunal's observations recorded as regards the mistakes/infirmities.
Addition u/s 56(2)(viib) r.w.r 11UA - excess premium charged - issuance of preference shares to the director/ex-director of the assessee company - The ITAT held that there was no justification for the A.O to have triggered the deeming provisions of Section 56(2)(viib) i.e a counter tax evasion provision - The ITAT addressed the valuation dispute, emphasizing the distinction between preference shares and equity shares, particularly focusing on their characteristics and the applicable methods for determining their FMV. It was noted that preference shares, due to their nature, could not be valued using the same method as equity shares. - Matter restored back for redetermine the FMV of the subject preference shares subject to the tribunal's observations recorded as regards the mistakes/infirmities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
