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" ?
HC quashed reassessment notice issued beyond four-year limitation period, holding it constituted impermissible review rather than valid reopening. Court determined that reassessment proceedings require tangible material beyond existing records to form requisite belief regarding income escapement. AO's reliance solely on previously filed return accepted under section 143(1) without additional material constituted arbitrary exercise of powers under section 147. Following Orient Craft Ltd precedent, HC ruled that absence of tangible material renders reopening without jurisdiction, distinguishing between legitimate reassessment based on new evidence versus prohibited review of earlier proceedings. Assessment invalidated in assessee's favor due to lack of substantive grounds for reopening.
HC quashed reassessment notice issued beyond four-year limitation period, holding it constituted impermissible review rather than valid reopening. Court determined that reassessment proceedings require tangible material beyond existing records to form requisite belief regarding income escapement. AO's reliance solely on previously filed return accepted under section 143(1) without additional material constituted arbitrary exercise of powers under section 147. Following Orient Craft Ltd precedent, HC ruled that absence of tangible material renders reopening without jurisdiction, distinguishing between legitimate reassessment based on new evidence versus prohibited review of earlier proceedings. Assessment invalidated in assessee's favor due to lack of substantive grounds for reopening.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.