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...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Rectification of mistake u/s 154 - limited scrutiny of “Agricultural Income” - The High Court deliberated on the challenge to an Impugned Notice issued u/s 154 - It examined the contentions of both parties regarding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer and the scope of rectification u/s 154. Finding that certain issues raised in the notice were not addressed in the original Assessment Order, the Court affirmed the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to rectify such errors. It emphasized that the power to rectify extends to mistakes of fact or law apparent from the record. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the validity of the Impugned Notice and allowing for further proceedings.
Rectification of mistake u/s 154 - limited scrutiny of “Agricultural Income” - The High Court deliberated on the challenge to an Impugned Notice issued u/s 154 - It examined the contentions of both parties regarding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer and the scope of rectification u/s 154. Finding that certain issues raised in the notice were not addressed in the original Assessment Order, the Court affirmed the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to rectify such errors. It emphasized that the power to rectify extends to mistakes of fact or law apparent from the record. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the validity of the Impugned Notice and allowing for further proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
