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...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
The ITAT held that the reopening of assessment under section 147 was invalid as the approval letter was improperly issued by an incompetent authority and consolidated for multiple independent assessees without independent satisfaction, violating section 151. Consequently, the issuance of notice under section 148 and subsequent proceedings were quashed. Regarding unexplained investments under section 69, the CIT(A) failed to exercise co-terminus powers to direct further inquiry, leading to a premature rejection of the assessee's evidence; thus, the additions were deleted. Penalty under section 271(1)(c) for non-compliance with notices was also deleted considering the appellant's occupation and genuine reasons for non-compliance. The appeals were allowed, setting aside the reassessment and penalty imposed by the revenue authorities.
The ITAT held that the reopening of assessment under section 147 was invalid as the approval letter was improperly issued by an incompetent authority and consolidated for multiple independent assessees without independent satisfaction, violating section 151. Consequently, the issuance of notice under section 148 and subsequent proceedings were quashed. Regarding unexplained investments under section 69, the CIT(A) failed to exercise co-terminus powers to direct further inquiry, leading to a premature rejection of the assessee's evidence; thus, the additions were deleted. Penalty under section 271(1)(c) for non-compliance with notices was also deleted considering the appellant's occupation and genuine reasons for non-compliance. The appeals were allowed, setting aside the reassessment and penalty imposed by the revenue authorities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
