Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
The DRP's directions are binding on the Assessing Officer, and a final assessment under section 144C must conform to those directions. Here, the Assessing Officer issued the final order by repeating the transfer pricing adjustment from the draft assessment, despite DRP directions requiring the adjustment to be reworked and the consequential effect order reflecting a reduced figure. The Tribunal treated this as a serious breach of the statutory mandate and quashed the final assessment order without any further inquiry into prejudice. The merits of the additions were left undecided.
The DRP's directions are binding on the Assessing Officer, and a final assessment under section 144C must conform to those directions. Here, the Assessing Officer issued the final order by repeating the transfer pricing adjustment from the draft assessment, despite DRP directions requiring the adjustment to be reworked and the consequential effect order reflecting a reduced figure. The Tribunal treated this as a serious breach of the statutory mandate and quashed the final assessment order without any further inquiry into prejudice. The merits of the additions were left undecided.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.