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 validity of the scrutiny process was challenged due to the lack of approval obtained by the Assessing Officer from the Jurisdictional Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, as mandated by CBDT Instruction No. 5/2017 dated 7.7.2017. It was held that non-compliance with CBDT instructions would render the entire assessment proceedings void ab initio. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT vs Best Plastics P Ltd, wherein it was ruled that the revenue is bound to follow CBDT instructions, and failure to do so would be fatal to the assessment proceedings. The jurisdictional defect cannot be cured by the provisions of Section 292BB of the Income Tax Act, as held in the case of LAXMAN DAS KHANDELWAL. Consequently, the entire assessment framed for the Assessment Year 2016-17 was quashed, and the assessee's cross-objections were allowed.
The validity of the scrutiny process was challenged due to the lack of approval obtained by the Assessing Officer from the Jurisdictional Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, as mandated by CBDT Instruction No. 5/2017 dated 7.7.2017. It was held that non-compliance with CBDT instructions would render the entire assessment proceedings void ab initio. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT vs Best Plastics P Ltd, wherein it was ruled that the revenue is bound to follow CBDT instructions, and failure to do so would be fatal to the assessment proceedings. The jurisdictional defect cannot be cured by the provisions of Section 292BB of the Income Tax Act, as held in the case of LAXMAN DAS KHANDELWAL. Consequently, the entire assessment framed for the Assessment Year 2016-17 was quashed, and the assessee's cross-objections were allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.