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...
The issue concerns whether an Assessing Officer may rely on a Valuation Officer (DVO) report delivered after the six month deadline in section 142A(6) to invoke the exclusion period under Explanation 1(v) to section 153 and thereby extend limitation. The HC agreed with the Tribunal that section 142A(6) requires the report within six months and that the exclusion-period and its proviso apply only where the report falls within that regime; a belated DVO report has no legal value to extend limitation, and the Principal Commissioner was not justified in revising the assessment under revision powers. Revenue appeal dismissed.
The issue concerns whether an Assessing Officer may rely on a Valuation Officer (DVO) report delivered after the six month deadline in section 142A(6) to invoke the exclusion period under Explanation 1(v) to section 153 and thereby extend limitation. The HC agreed with the Tribunal that section 142A(6) requires the report within six months and that the exclusion-period and its proviso apply only where the report falls within that regime; a belated DVO report has no legal value to extend limitation, and the Principal Commissioner was not justified in revising the assessment under revision powers. Revenue appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
