Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Issuance of a reassessment notice under the new regime required compliance with the sanction structure in section 151, and where more than three years had elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, prior approval had to be obtained from the Principal Chief Commissioner or equivalent authority under section 151(ii). Because the notice for AY 2016-17 was approved by the Pr. CIT instead of the specified authority, the approval was held jurisdictionally defective. The Tribunal treated proper sanction as a mandatory pre-condition, quashed the section 148 notice, and held that the consequential reassessment under section 147 could not survive; the merits were left academic.
Issuance of a reassessment notice under the new regime required compliance with the sanction structure in section 151, and where more than three years had elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, prior approval had to be obtained from the Principal Chief Commissioner or equivalent authority under section 151(ii). Because the notice for AY 2016-17 was approved by the Pr. CIT instead of the specified authority, the approval was held jurisdictionally defective. The Tribunal treated proper sanction as a mandatory pre-condition, quashed the section 148 notice, and held that the consequential reassessment under section 147 could not survive; the merits were left academic.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.