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...
When a filed return is selected for scrutiny, the scope is ordinarily limited to verifying and disallowing claims and does not permit the Assessing Officer to reduce income voluntarily admitted by the taxpayer; statutory remedies exist to correct any erroneous admission but were not availed here. Circulars relied upon did not require reversion of a voluntarily declared return. A post-survey voluntary declaration incorporated in a later return and not retracted or revised under the Act was treated as conscious admission; the burden to prove evidentiary basis does not shift to the Assessing Officer. Tribunal factual findings upheld; taxpayer appeal dismissed.
When a filed return is selected for scrutiny, the scope is ordinarily limited to verifying and disallowing claims and does not permit the Assessing Officer to reduce income voluntarily admitted by the taxpayer; statutory remedies exist to correct any erroneous admission but were not availed here. Circulars relied upon did not require reversion of a voluntarily declared return. A post-survey voluntary declaration incorporated in a later return and not retracted or revised under the Act was treated as conscious admission; the burden to prove evidentiary basis does not shift to the Assessing Officer. Tribunal factual findings upheld; taxpayer appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.