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...
Unexplained creditor u/s. 68 - onus to prove - The ITAT ruled that once the identity of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction are established, proving the creditor's capacity is not mandatory for the assessee. This is supported by the precedent set in "Labh Chand Bohra Vs. ITO" by the Rajasthan High Court, aligning with the doctrine that the onus shifts away from the assessee once the initial proof of transaction is provided.
Unexplained creditor u/s. 68 - onus to prove - The ITAT ruled that once the identity of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction are established, proving the creditor's capacity is not mandatory for the assessee. This is supported by the precedent set in "Labh Chand Bohra Vs. ITO" by the Rajasthan High Court, aligning with the doctrine that the onus shifts away from the assessee once the initial proof of transaction is provided.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.