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 High Court quashed the rectification notice, rectification order, and notice of demand issued u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, holding that the order of determination made by the Designated Authority under the DTVSV Act attained finality and could not be reopened or revised by any authority under the Income Tax Act. The court observed that the determination made under the DTVSV Act is rendered final, except where the application is found to suffer from an incorrect declaration or suppression of material facts. The action u/s 154 did not fall within the ambit of the exception provided in Section 4(6) of the DTVSV Act. The court emphasized the legislative intent of the DTVSV Act to accord closure to tax disputes and the finality attached to the determination made thereunder.
The High Court quashed the rectification notice, rectification order, and notice of demand issued u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, holding that the order of determination made by the Designated Authority under the DTVSV Act attained finality and could not be reopened or revised by any authority under the Income Tax Act. The court observed that the determination made under the DTVSV Act is rendered final, except where the application is found to suffer from an incorrect declaration or suppression of material facts. The action u/s 154 did not fall within the ambit of the exception provided in Section 4(6) of the DTVSV Act. The court emphasized the legislative intent of the DTVSV Act to accord closure to tax disputes and the finality attached to the determination made thereunder.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
