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" ?
ITAT allowed the appellant's appeal, quashing assessment orders due to invalid approval under section 153D. The approving authority granted mechanical approval without examining draft orders or indicating thought process, merely rubber-stamping the request using statutory language. Following Orissa HC precedent in ACIT vs Serajuddin & Co., ITAT held that section 153D approval requires meaningful examination by approving authority with indication of reasoning, not mere procedural compliance. Single approval covering multiple assessment years without reference to seized materials demonstrated lack of proper application of mind. Court emphasized that mechanical approval vitiates entire assessment order, as section 153D compliance is mandatory substantive requirement, not mere procedural formality. Revenue's contention that approval is non-justiciable was rejected, establishing that courts can examine approval validity.
ITAT allowed the appellant's appeal, quashing assessment orders due to invalid approval under section 153D. The approving authority granted mechanical approval without examining draft orders or indicating thought process, merely rubber-stamping the request using statutory language. Following Orissa HC precedent in ACIT vs Serajuddin & Co., ITAT held that section 153D approval requires meaningful examination by approving authority with indication of reasoning, not mere procedural compliance. Single approval covering multiple assessment years without reference to seized materials demonstrated lack of proper application of mind. Court emphasized that mechanical approval vitiates entire assessment order, as section 153D compliance is mandatory substantive requirement, not mere procedural formality. Revenue's contention that approval is non-justiciable was rejected, establishing that courts can examine approval validity.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.