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 held that the assessment proceedings were invalid for want of jurisdiction. Jurisdictional notices under s.143(2) were issued by ITO Ward 39(4) and the file was subsequently treated as transferred to ITO Ward 36(4) and finally ITO Ward 36(6) without any valid order under s.127(1); consequently the transferee AO did not acquire jurisdiction to complete assessment. The tribunal concluded that the AO in ITO Ward 36(6) lacked authority to pass the assessment order, quashed the entire proceedings and allowed the grounds raised by the assessee.
ITAT held that the assessment proceedings were invalid for want of jurisdiction. Jurisdictional notices under s.143(2) were issued by ITO Ward 39(4) and the file was subsequently treated as transferred to ITO Ward 36(4) and finally ITO Ward 36(6) without any valid order under s.127(1); consequently the transferee AO did not acquire jurisdiction to complete assessment. The tribunal concluded that the AO in ITO Ward 36(6) lacked authority to pass the assessment order, quashed the entire proceedings and allowed the grounds raised by the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.