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 HC held that the period of limitation for reopening assessments under Section 153C read with Section 153A must be calculated from the end of the assessment year relevant to the financial year in which the reopening action was initiated (i.e., when the Section 148 notice was issued). Since the assessment year in question (AY 2014-15) fell beyond the ten-year limitation period contemplated in these provisions, the Court allowed the petition and set aside the impugned notice as time-barred. This ruling clarifies how the block period for reopening assessments should be determined when applying limitation provisions.
The HC held that the period of limitation for reopening assessments under Section 153C read with Section 153A must be calculated from the end of the assessment year relevant to the financial year in which the reopening action was initiated (i.e., when the Section 148 notice was issued). Since the assessment year in question (AY 2014-15) fell beyond the ten-year limitation period contemplated in these provisions, the Court allowed the petition and set aside the impugned notice as time-barred. This ruling clarifies how the block period for reopening assessments should be determined when applying limitation provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.