Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Rectification under section 154 cannot be used to reopen a claim on surcharge and education cess under the India-USA DTAA once the issue has already been decided in a speaking appellate order. The Tribunal held that this was not a mistake apparent from the record, because section 154 does not permit reappreciation or modification of a concluded issue. It also noted that the jurisdictional High Court had taken the same view against the assessee. The rectification order was therefore upheld and the assessee's challenge failed.
Rectification under section 154 cannot be used to reopen a claim on surcharge and education cess under the India-USA DTAA once the issue has already been decided in a speaking appellate order. The Tribunal held that this was not a mistake apparent from the record, because section 154 does not permit reappreciation or modification of a concluded issue. It also noted that the jurisdictional High Court had taken the same view against the assessee. The rectification order was therefore upheld and the assessee's challenge failed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.