Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The case pertains to the reopening of assessment u/s 147, where the reasons recorded were based on audit objections raised by the internal audit party regarding underassessment of income and default determination of Transfer Pricing (TP) Adjustment. The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) made a markup of 12% on direct costs, but the audit objection suggested reducing it to 9.17% after accounting for foreign exchange risk of 1%. The court held that the TPO's order was detailed, considering all aspects, and the audit objection amounted to a mere change of opinion without any failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose material facts. Since the impugned notice was issued beyond four years, the respondent could not have assumed jurisdiction based on audit objections. Regarding the reduced exchange gain on sale of shares, the assessee made full disclosure, and there was no failure to disclose material facts, preventing the respondent from reopening the assessment u/s 147's proviso. The decision was in favor of the assessee.
The case pertains to the reopening of assessment u/s 147, where the reasons recorded were based on audit objections raised by the internal audit party regarding underassessment of income and default determination of Transfer Pricing (TP) Adjustment. The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) made a markup of 12% on direct costs, but the audit objection suggested reducing it to 9.17% after accounting for foreign exchange risk of 1%. The court held that the TPO's order was detailed, considering all aspects, and the audit objection amounted to a mere change of opinion without any failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose material facts. Since the impugned notice was issued beyond four years, the respondent could not have assumed jurisdiction based on audit objections. Regarding the reduced exchange gain on sale of shares, the assessee made full disclosure, and there was no failure to disclose material facts, preventing the respondent from reopening the assessment u/s 147's proviso. The decision was in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
