Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The assessment reopening u/s 147 read with Section 148 was found to be unsustainable due to the lack of independent application of mind by the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) in granting approval. The CIT's approval was given in a slipshod manner without recording their own satisfaction, rendering the subsequent notice u/s 148 and assessment proceedings invalid. The addition made u/s 69 was also found to be improper as the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to invoke or apply any specific provision of law while making the addition. The AO did not specify the head under which the addition was made, whether business income, capital gains, or u/ss 48, 56, 68, or 69. Making an addition without invoking the relevant provision of the Act is against the law and liable to be deleted. The reasons for the addition cannot be supplemented by the assessment order or affidavit, and the assessee must be notified of the exact contravention or provision under which the assessment or additions are sought. Consequently, the addition sustained by the lower authorities deserves to be deleted, and the appeal allowed on merits.
The assessment reopening u/s 147 read with Section 148 was found to be unsustainable due to the lack of independent application of mind by the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) in granting approval. The CIT's approval was given in a slipshod manner without recording their own satisfaction, rendering the subsequent notice u/s 148 and assessment proceedings invalid. The addition made u/s 69 was also found to be improper as the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to invoke or apply any specific provision of law while making the addition. The AO did not specify the head under which the addition was made, whether business income, capital gains, or u/ss 48, 56, 68, or 69. Making an addition without invoking the relevant provision of the Act is against the law and liable to be deleted. The reasons for the addition cannot be supplemented by the assessment order or affidavit, and the assessee must be notified of the exact contravention or provision under which the assessment or additions are sought. Consequently, the addition sustained by the lower authorities deserves to be deleted, and the appeal allowed on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.