Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
Contingency expenses, exempt-income disallowance, and royalty benchmarking: unsupported adjustments were deleted under consistent accounting and trans...
The ITAT upheld the validity of the reopening notice issued under section 148, finding that it was issued within the three-year limitation period prescribed under section 149, excluding the time allowed for the assessee to respond under section 148A(d). The Tribunal confirmed that prior approval under section 151 was duly obtained before issuance of the notice. The contention regarding retrospective applicability of the Finance Act, 2023 amendment to section 151 was left open for future determination. On merits, due to lack of substantive arguments and the protective nature of the assessment against the assessee, the matter was remanded to the AO for fresh adjudication after considering the status of related proceedings against the assessee's spouse and affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.
The ITAT upheld the validity of the reopening notice issued under section 148, finding that it was issued within the three-year limitation period prescribed under section 149, excluding the time allowed for the assessee to respond under section 148A(d). The Tribunal confirmed that prior approval under section 151 was duly obtained before issuance of the notice. The contention regarding retrospective applicability of the Finance Act, 2023 amendment to section 151 was left open for future determination. On merits, due to lack of substantive arguments and the protective nature of the assessment against the assessee, the matter was remanded to the AO for fresh adjudication after considering the status of related proceedings against the assessee's spouse and affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.