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 examined the validity of assessments u/s 153A and whether the specified authority granted approval in accordance with Section 153D. The court emphasized that approval u/s 153D must be granted for "each assessment year" and "each assessee" separately. Referring to a decision by the Allahabad High Court, it was highlighted that the approval process cannot be a mere formality but requires a genuine application of mind. The court noted that in the case at hand, a single approval was granted for multiple assessment years without individual scrutiny, raising concerns about the lack of independent assessment. Upholding the ITAT's decision, the court stressed the importance of thorough assessments and independent consideration for each assessment year.
The Delhi High Court examined the validity of assessments u/s 153A and whether the specified authority granted approval in accordance with Section 153D. The court emphasized that approval u/s 153D must be granted for "each assessment year" and "each assessee" separately. Referring to a decision by the Allahabad High Court, it was highlighted that the approval process cannot be a mere formality but requires a genuine application of mind. The court noted that in the case at hand, a single approval was granted for multiple assessment years without individual scrutiny, raising concerns about the lack of independent assessment. Upholding the ITAT's decision, the court stressed the importance of thorough assessments and independent consideration for each assessment year.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
