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 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.