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...
Reopening of assessment - reasons to believe - On the issue of disclosure and compliance with TDS provisions, the court found that the petitioner had indeed disclosed all material facts during the original assessment proceedings. The transactions in question were merely transfers of funds on instructions from the horse owners. - The court held that the objections raised by the petitioner against the reassessment were valid. The authorities had failed to consider the full scope of the disclosures made during the original assessments and erroneously pursued reassessment.
Reopening of assessment - reasons to believe - On the issue of disclosure and compliance with TDS provisions, the court found that the petitioner had indeed disclosed all material facts during the original assessment proceedings. The transactions in question were merely transfers of funds on instructions from the horse owners. - The court held that the objections raised by the petitioner against the reassessment were valid. The authorities had failed to consider the full scope of the disclosures made during the original assessments and erroneously pursued reassessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.