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 ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 154 read with Section 143(3) and by the CIT(A). The AO erred in passing the order u/s 154 by making the disallowance of amortization of telecom license u/s 35ABB and depreciation on right to use telecom spectrum u/s 32. The CIT(A) also erred by disallowing an amount which was not part of the appeal before them. The ITAT held that the CIT(A) exercised jurisdiction beyond the scope of the appeal by disallowing an amount which was part of separate appeal proceedings. Accordingly, the ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and additional grounds, deleting the disallowances made by the AO and CIT(A).
The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 154 read with Section 143(3) and by the CIT(A). The AO erred in passing the order u/s 154 by making the disallowance of amortization of telecom license u/s 35ABB and depreciation on right to use telecom spectrum u/s 32. The CIT(A) also erred by disallowing an amount which was not part of the appeal before them. The ITAT held that the CIT(A) exercised jurisdiction beyond the scope of the appeal by disallowing an amount which was part of separate appeal proceedings. Accordingly, the ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and additional grounds, deleting the disallowances made by the AO and CIT(A).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
