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...
The Delhi High Court considered the addition u/s 68 and the evidentiary value of statements recorded u/s 132(4). The court emphasized that an assessment cannot be based solely on presumptions or statements without corroborating material. While statements are considered information, they must be supported by evidence found during a search for assessment. The court also discussed rectification u/s 292B, stating that jurisdictional defects cannot be cured under this section, rendering proceedings void. In this case, the Revenue failed to link seized material to the assessee group, leading to the assessment being set aside in favor of the assessee by the ITAT.
The Delhi High Court considered the addition u/s 68 and the evidentiary value of statements recorded u/s 132(4). The court emphasized that an assessment cannot be based solely on presumptions or statements without corroborating material. While statements are considered information, they must be supported by evidence found during a search for assessment. The court also discussed rectification u/s 292B, stating that jurisdictional defects cannot be cured under this section, rendering proceedings void. In this case, the Revenue failed to link seized material to the assessee group, leading to the assessment being set aside in favor of the assessee by the ITAT.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
