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...
Validity of reopening of assessment - The High Court notes that certain incomes were raised for the first time in the impugned order, without prior mention. Despite Petitioner's explanations and evidence, the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to justify dissatisfaction with the disclosures. The Court concludes that the impugned order was passed without proper application of mind, as evident from the lack of scrutiny by higher authorities. Consequently, the Court quashes the impugned order and the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act.
Validity of reopening of assessment - The High Court notes that certain incomes were raised for the first time in the impugned order, without prior mention. Despite Petitioner's explanations and evidence, the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to justify dissatisfaction with the disclosures. The Court concludes that the impugned order was passed without proper application of mind, as evident from the lack of scrutiny by higher authorities. Consequently, the Court quashes the impugned order and the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.