Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
Penalty under s. 271(1)(c) read with s. 274 was challenged on the ground that the notice did not specify whether the charge was "concealment of income" or "furnishing inaccurate particulars of income." Since penalty proceedings are penal in nature, the charge must be unequivocal and unambiguous; the AO is required to strike off the inapplicable limb and cannot club both limbs in the notice. As the AO failed to strike off either limb and left the notice vague, the penalty proceedings were held invalid and the penalty was quashed, granting relief to the taxpayer. - ITAT
Penalty under s. 271(1)(c) read with s. 274 was challenged on the ground that the notice did not specify whether the charge was "concealment of income" or "furnishing inaccurate particulars of income." Since penalty proceedings are penal in nature, the charge must be unequivocal and unambiguous; the AO is required to strike off the inapplicable limb and cannot club both limbs in the notice. As the AO failed to strike off either limb and left the notice vague, the penalty proceedings were held invalid and the penalty was quashed, granting relief to the taxpayer. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.