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...
Validity of penalty proceedings turned on whether the limitation period in clause (c) of Section 275(1) is residuary; the court held clause (c) is residuary and clauses (a) or (b) apply where penalty proceedings originate from an assessment or revision. Because the penalty under the special provision arose from an assessment linked to admissions during search and was appealed, the court applied the limitation computation under clause (a), measuring six months from receipt of the appellate tribunal order and finding the penalty issued on the final permissible date. Revision proceedings were quashed, so clause (b) did not apply, and the writ was dismissed.
Validity of penalty proceedings turned on whether the limitation period in clause (c) of Section 275(1) is residuary; the court held clause (c) is residuary and clauses (a) or (b) apply where penalty proceedings originate from an assessment or revision. Because the penalty under the special provision arose from an assessment linked to admissions during search and was appealed, the court applied the limitation computation under clause (a), measuring six months from receipt of the appellate tribunal order and finding the penalty issued on the final permissible date. Revision proceedings were quashed, so clause (b) did not apply, and the writ was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.