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" ?
Reopening of assessment failed because the sanction under section 151 was mechanical and not granted with application of mind by the competent authority. The approving authority merely recorded that it was a fit case for issuing notice under section 148, without proper particulars such as the date of approval or any meaningful consideration of the proposal. Following settled law that such perfunctory approval is invalid, the ITAT held that the statutory precondition for reopening was not met. Accordingly, the entire reassessment proceedings were quashed.
Reopening of assessment failed because the sanction under section 151 was mechanical and not granted with application of mind by the competent authority. The approving authority merely recorded that it was a fit case for issuing notice under section 148, without proper particulars such as the date of approval or any meaningful consideration of the proposal. Following settled law that such perfunctory approval is invalid, the ITAT held that the statutory precondition for reopening was not met. Accordingly, the entire reassessment proceedings were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.