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...
An inchoate agreement to sell, lacking execution by both parties and showing patent ambiguity, could not be treated as conclusive evidence of receipt of unaccounted on-money. The Tribunal held that an admission must be clear, unambiguous and unconditional, and that the seized document, without material particulars such as witness details or the drafter's identity and without the beneficiary's participation, did not justify an inference of undisclosed cash receipts. The additions based on that document were therefore deleted, and the consequential penalty was also deleted.
An inchoate agreement to sell, lacking execution by both parties and showing patent ambiguity, could not be treated as conclusive evidence of receipt of unaccounted on-money. The Tribunal held that an admission must be clear, unambiguous and unconditional, and that the seized document, without material particulars such as witness details or the drafter's identity and without the beneficiary's participation, did not justify an inference of undisclosed cash receipts. The additions based on that document were therefore deleted, and the consequential penalty was also deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
