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 first proviso to Section 143(1)(a) is mandatory and requires that any proposed adjustment to a return of income be intimated to the assessee in writing or electronically and the assessee be given an opportunity to respond; failure to issue that intimation renders any adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) invalid. On the facts, no such intimation was issued and the intimation order was quashed. The Revenue's argument that issuing the intimation would be futile was rejected: compliance with the mandatory intimation requirement cannot be bypassed, and the assessee could potentially respond (including by seeking condonation) before any adjustment is made.
The first proviso to Section 143(1)(a) is mandatory and requires that any proposed adjustment to a return of income be intimated to the assessee in writing or electronically and the assessee be given an opportunity to respond; failure to issue that intimation renders any adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) invalid. On the facts, no such intimation was issued and the intimation order was quashed. The Revenue's argument that issuing the intimation would be futile was rejected: compliance with the mandatory intimation requirement cannot be bypassed, and the assessee could potentially respond (including by seeking condonation) before any adjustment is made.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.