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...
Transfer under section 127 was upheld because coordinated investigation is a valid administrative ground, and the assessee had no vested right to assessment at a particular place; the order was supported by notice, stated reasons, and consideration of the surrounding circumstances, so no mala fides or arbitrariness was shown. The notice under section 153A was quashed because the search record disclosed no incriminating material, the warrant alone was insufficient, and the foundational satisfaction for search-based proceedings had to exist on record. The reassessment proceedings were also held time barred, as the department was not restrained from completing assessment after notice under section 144 and the statutory period expired.
Transfer under section 127 was upheld because coordinated investigation is a valid administrative ground, and the assessee had no vested right to assessment at a particular place; the order was supported by notice, stated reasons, and consideration of the surrounding circumstances, so no mala fides or arbitrariness was shown. The notice under section 153A was quashed because the search record disclosed no incriminating material, the warrant alone was insufficient, and the foundational satisfaction for search-based proceedings had to exist on record. The reassessment proceedings were also held time barred, as the department was not restrained from completing assessment after notice under section 144 and the statutory period expired.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
