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 ITAT ruled in favor of the non-resident Indian taxpayer, invalidating the reopening of assessment under section 147. The notice under section 148 was initially issued by ITO Ward-3(1), Chandigarh, who lacked jurisdiction over NRI assessees. Subsequently, DCIT, International Taxation assumed jurisdiction based on this invalid notice without issuing a fresh notice. The Tribunal noted that the taxpayer had resided in Afghanistan until returning to India under adverse circumstances, and emphasized that the ITO's unilateral transfer of the case to DCIT, International Taxation could not cure the jurisdictional defect. The proceedings were held bad in law due to the initial issuance by a non-jurisdictional authority.
The ITAT ruled in favor of the non-resident Indian taxpayer, invalidating the reopening of assessment under section 147. The notice under section 148 was initially issued by ITO Ward-3(1), Chandigarh, who lacked jurisdiction over NRI assessees. Subsequently, DCIT, International Taxation assumed jurisdiction based on this invalid notice without issuing a fresh notice. The Tribunal noted that the taxpayer had resided in Afghanistan until returning to India under adverse circumstances, and emphasized that the ITO's unilateral transfer of the case to DCIT, International Taxation could not cure the jurisdictional defect. The proceedings were held bad in law due to the initial issuance by a non-jurisdictional authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.