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 HC set aside an ex-parte assessment order under Section 74 for lack of reasoning and violation of natural justice principles. The petitioner challenged the assessment arising from a typographical error in their return where a decimal point was inadvertently omitted. The impugned order merely recorded issuance of show cause notice DRC-01A and absence of reply on the online portal, leading to ex-parte proceedings. However, the order failed to establish requisite findings of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts necessary for invoking Section 74. The HC found the order unsustainable due to absence of detailed reasoning and remitted the matter to the proper officer for re-adjudication in accordance with law.
The HC set aside an ex-parte assessment order under Section 74 for lack of reasoning and violation of natural justice principles. The petitioner challenged the assessment arising from a typographical error in their return where a decimal point was inadvertently omitted. The impugned order merely recorded issuance of show cause notice DRC-01A and absence of reply on the online portal, leading to ex-parte proceedings. However, the order failed to establish requisite findings of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts necessary for invoking Section 74. The HC found the order unsustainable due to absence of detailed reasoning and remitted the matter to the proper officer for re-adjudication in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
