Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
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...
ITAT held that a challenge to reassessment on jurisdictional grounds can be raised even if not pressed before the first appellate authority, because lack of jurisdiction goes to the root and cannot be cured by waiver or acquiescence. It further held that where the notice under section 148 was issued after three years from the end of the assessment year, section 151(ii) required sanction from the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner, not the Principal Commissioner. As the prescribed approval was absent, the reassessment notice and all consequential proceedings were void, and the reassessment was quashed.
ITAT held that a challenge to reassessment on jurisdictional grounds can be raised even if not pressed before the first appellate authority, because lack of jurisdiction goes to the root and cannot be cured by waiver or acquiescence. It further held that where the notice under section 148 was issued after three years from the end of the assessment year, section 151(ii) required sanction from the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner, not the Principal Commissioner. As the prescribed approval was absent, the reassessment notice and all consequential proceedings were void, and the reassessment was quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.