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 SC held that the respondent's Section 34 application under the ACA, filed on 11.07.2022 (the next court working day), was within the limitation period and required no condonation of delay. The High Court correctly allowed the Section 37 appeal, determining the application was timely filed. The Court declined to interfere with the High Court's interim direction staying execution of pending recovery until merits adjudication, noting the appellant had already withdrawn 50% of the arbitral sum deposited by the respondent. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
The SC held that the respondent's Section 34 application under the ACA, filed on 11.07.2022 (the next court working day), was within the limitation period and required no condonation of delay. The High Court correctly allowed the Section 37 appeal, determining the application was timely filed. The Court declined to interfere with the High Court's interim direction staying execution of pending recovery until merits adjudication, noting the appellant had already withdrawn 50% of the arbitral sum deposited by the respondent. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.