Regulatory consolidation for investment advisers: SEBI issues master circular consolidating guidance and prescribing compliance, reporting, fees and s...
Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
Where the original return was only processed under section 143(1), there was no assessment order reflecting formation of opinion, so reopening could not be struck down as a mere change of opinion and the Tribunal could examine the jurisdictional issue. On merits, interest earned on deposits of funds earmarked for acquisition of technical know-how, land, machinery and other project commitments had a direct nexus with setting up the manufacturing business. Such receipts were therefore to be adjusted against pre-operative expenditure and not taxed as income from other sources. The High Court upheld reassessment but rejected the Revenue's treatment of the interest as taxable income.
Where the original return was only processed under section 143(1), there was no assessment order reflecting formation of opinion, so reopening could not be struck down as a mere change of opinion and the Tribunal could examine the jurisdictional issue. On merits, interest earned on deposits of funds earmarked for acquisition of technical know-how, land, machinery and other project commitments had a direct nexus with setting up the manufacturing business. Such receipts were therefore to be adjusted against pre-operative expenditure and not taxed as income from other sources. The High Court upheld reassessment but rejected the Revenue's treatment of the interest as taxable income.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.