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...
Section 32A(2) of the IBC bars attachment or other action against a corporate debtor's property for offences committed before commencement of insolvency, and the statutory explanation expressly includes attachment within the prohibited action. Where the corporate debtor had already entered liquidation before the provisional attachment order was issued, the later attachment could not be sustained. The tribunal therefore treated both the provisional attachment order and its confirmation as contrary to Section 32A(2) and set them aside, holding that the property of the liquidating corporate debtor was immune from such post-liquidation attachment.
Section 32A(2) of the IBC bars attachment or other action against a corporate debtor's property for offences committed before commencement of insolvency, and the statutory explanation expressly includes attachment within the prohibited action. Where the corporate debtor had already entered liquidation before the provisional attachment order was issued, the later attachment could not be sustained. The tribunal therefore treated both the provisional attachment order and its confirmation as contrary to Section 32A(2) and set them aside, holding that the property of the liquidating corporate debtor was immune from such post-liquidation attachment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
