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" ?
The HC held that the Assessing Officer (AO) lacked jurisdiction to reopen an assessment order dated 19.12.2018 by invoking Section 154 of the Act of 1961 after the matter had been conclusively adjudicated by the designated authority under the DTVSV Act 2020, which issued a certificate of closure on 05.11.2021. Section 154 permits rectification of mistakes in orders passed by the AO but does not empower the AO to invalidate or override the final declaration issued by the designated authority under Section 5 of the DTVSV Act. The court emphasized that the AO cannot unsettle or render redundant the designated authority's order through a purported rectification. The Revisional Authority's endorsement of the AO's reopening was also set aside for failure to appreciate this legal position. Consequently, the reopening of the assessment was quashed, affirming the finality of the designated authority's certificate.
The HC held that the Assessing Officer (AO) lacked jurisdiction to reopen an assessment order dated 19.12.2018 by invoking Section 154 of the Act of 1961 after the matter had been conclusively adjudicated by the designated authority under the DTVSV Act 2020, which issued a certificate of closure on 05.11.2021. Section 154 permits rectification of mistakes in orders passed by the AO but does not empower the AO to invalidate or override the final declaration issued by the designated authority under Section 5 of the DTVSV Act. The court emphasized that the AO cannot unsettle or render redundant the designated authority's order through a purported rectification. The Revisional Authority's endorsement of the AO's reopening was also set aside for failure to appreciate this legal position. Consequently, the reopening of the assessment was quashed, affirming the finality of the designated authority's certificate.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
