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...
An existing trust had previously been granted approval u/ss 12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act. However, instead of applying under clause (i) of the proviso to Section 80G, which is applicable for existing trusts, it incorrectly applied under clause (iii) as a new trust. Clause (i) does not require any provisional approval, and the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner would have granted approval for five years upon written application. The controversy arose due to the incorrect mention of clause (iv) instead of clause (i) in Form No. 10AC, which the assessee admitted was an error. Since Form No. 10AC was filed on time, the incorrect clause mention is considered a curable defect. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) is set aside, and they are required to consider the application as filed under clause (i) of the first proviso to Section 80G(5) and grant approval accordingly. The assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
An existing trust had previously been granted approval u/ss 12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act. However, instead of applying under clause (i) of the proviso to Section 80G, which is applicable for existing trusts, it incorrectly applied under clause (iii) as a new trust. Clause (i) does not require any provisional approval, and the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner would have granted approval for five years upon written application. The controversy arose due to the incorrect mention of clause (iv) instead of clause (i) in Form No. 10AC, which the assessee admitted was an error. Since Form No. 10AC was filed on time, the incorrect clause mention is considered a curable defect. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) is set aside, and they are required to consider the application as filed under clause (i) of the first proviso to Section 80G(5) and grant approval accordingly. The assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
