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 quashed assessment proceedings under section 153C for all four assessment years due to jurisdictional defects. The assessee was subject to survey under section 133A, not search action, yet the Assessing Officer issued notices under section 153A and obtained approval under section 153D without proper application of mind. The satisfaction note under section 153C was based on seized work order that did not "belong to" the assessee but merely "pertained to" the assessee. Since the search, satisfaction note, and notices were all issued prior to June 1, 2015, the pre-amendment provisions applied requiring documents to "belong to" rather than "pertain to" the other person. The assessment proceedings lacked proper jurisdiction and were held invalid.
ITAT quashed assessment proceedings under section 153C for all four assessment years due to jurisdictional defects. The assessee was subject to survey under section 133A, not search action, yet the Assessing Officer issued notices under section 153A and obtained approval under section 153D without proper application of mind. The satisfaction note under section 153C was based on seized work order that did not "belong to" the assessee but merely "pertained to" the assessee. Since the search, satisfaction note, and notices were all issued prior to June 1, 2015, the pre-amendment provisions applied requiring documents to "belong to" rather than "pertain to" the other person. The assessment proceedings lacked proper jurisdiction and were held invalid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.