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...
Undisclosed income of the assessee - bogus sale of agricultural produce - preponderance of probability theory - The Tribunal noted that the AO had not properly considered the nature of the appellant’s income and the agricultural evidence provided. It was observed that the lower authorities failed to appreciate the complexities of agricultural income and its proof, particularly in light of the transactions during the demonetization period. - The statements recorded by the AO, including those of a person responsible for the appellant's agricultural affairs, did not conclusively prove that the agricultural receipts were manipulated. - The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the addition of income.
Undisclosed income of the assessee - bogus sale of agricultural produce - preponderance of probability theory - The Tribunal noted that the AO had not properly considered the nature of the appellant’s income and the agricultural evidence provided. It was observed that the lower authorities failed to appreciate the complexities of agricultural income and its proof, particularly in light of the transactions during the demonetization period. - The statements recorded by the AO, including those of a person responsible for the appellant's agricultural affairs, did not conclusively prove that the agricultural receipts were manipulated. - The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the addition of income.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
