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" ?
Reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 147 were quashed by ITAT for violation of principles of natural justice due to lack of opportunity for cross-examination of statements relied upon for making unexplained investment addition u/s 69. ITAT held that assessee must be provided materials/statements used against them and given adequate opportunity to explain. Mere retraction statements obtained later cannot cure initial violation. AO failed to conduct further enquiries to unearth circumstantial evidence supporting impugned statements. Reassessment order passed in violation of natural justice, assessee's appeal allowed.
Reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 147 were quashed by ITAT for violation of principles of natural justice due to lack of opportunity for cross-examination of statements relied upon for making unexplained investment addition u/s 69. ITAT held that assessee must be provided materials/statements used against them and given adequate opportunity to explain. Mere retraction statements obtained later cannot cure initial violation. AO failed to conduct further enquiries to unearth circumstantial evidence supporting impugned statements. Reassessment order passed in violation of natural justice, assessee's appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.