Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
Contingency expenses, exempt-income disallowance, and royalty benchmarking: unsupported adjustments were deleted under consistent accounting and trans...
The assessee provided project advisory services to Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) formed to execute infrastructure contracts obtained from NHAI. The assessee contended that the SPVs were its 'enterprise' or 'undertaking' for claiming deduction u/s 80IA. However, it was held that the SPVs were separate legal entities executing the infrastructure facility development and operation work. The assessee raised invoices on the SPVs for its services, indicating recognition of the SPVs as separate entities. The SPVs filed separate returns, and the assessee's income was not credited to its profit and loss account, contrary to an owned enterprise. The consortium members charged the SPVs more than their costs, earning profits. Therefore, the SPVs could not be considered the assessee's undertaking, and the assessee merely executed a works contract for the SPVs. Consequently, the assessee was ineligible for deduction u/s 80IA as a works contractor. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the rejection of the Section 80IA deduction claim.
The assessee provided project advisory services to Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) formed to execute infrastructure contracts obtained from NHAI. The assessee contended that the SPVs were its 'enterprise' or 'undertaking' for claiming deduction u/s 80IA. However, it was held that the SPVs were separate legal entities executing the infrastructure facility development and operation work. The assessee raised invoices on the SPVs for its services, indicating recognition of the SPVs as separate entities. The SPVs filed separate returns, and the assessee's income was not credited to its profit and loss account, contrary to an owned enterprise. The consortium members charged the SPVs more than their costs, earning profits. Therefore, the SPVs could not be considered the assessee's undertaking, and the assessee merely executed a works contract for the SPVs. Consequently, the assessee was ineligible for deduction u/s 80IA as a works contractor. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the rejection of the Section 80IA deduction claim.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.