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...
Revision jurisdiction was contested where revenue sought to revise an assessment by treating purchases as bogus. Tribunal found the assessing officer had issued statutory notices, conducted inquiries including notices to suppliers, and taken a plausible view after considering submissions; therefore the revisional officer could not substitute that view under the power to correct orders deemed "prejudicial to the interests of the revenue." Clauses in Explanation 2 relied on by the revisional officer were held unsupported by facts or law, the revisional order was set aside, and the appeal decided against the revenue.
Revision jurisdiction was contested where revenue sought to revise an assessment by treating purchases as bogus. Tribunal found the assessing officer had issued statutory notices, conducted inquiries including notices to suppliers, and taken a plausible view after considering submissions; therefore the revisional officer could not substitute that view under the power to correct orders deemed "prejudicial to the interests of the revenue." Clauses in Explanation 2 relied on by the revisional officer were held unsupported by facts or law, the revisional order was set aside, and the appeal decided against the revenue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
