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...
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the...
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) deleted where income was disclosed in section 153A returns and remaining additions were only estimated or computational.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the income had already been disclosed in returns filed in response to section 153A notices and accepted in assessment, because such disclosure could not by itself amount to concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Tribunal also found that the remaining additions were only estimated deemed brokerage adjustments and calculation errors, which did not meet the statutory threshold for penalty. On those facts, the penalties for the relevant assessment years were deleted.
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the income had already been disclosed in returns filed in response to section 153A notices and accepted in assessment, because such disclosure could not by itself amount to concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Tribunal also found that the remaining additions were only estimated deemed brokerage adjustments and calculation errors, which did not meet the statutory threshold for penalty. On those facts, the penalties for the relevant assessment years were deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.