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...
Provident fund, pension fund and gratuity fund dues are excluded from the liquidation estate under Section 36(4)(a)(iii) and cannot be brought into the waterfall under Section 53. The absence of a separately maintained fund does not remove that statutory protection, and such dues must be provided for from the corporate debtor's available funds. The Tribunal therefore found the claim could not be treated as a distribution claim and remitted the matter for fresh examination in accordance with law. It also held that provident fund dues relatable to a separate legal entity could not be fastened on the corporate debtor, as distinct entities carry separate liabilities.
Provident fund, pension fund and gratuity fund dues are excluded from the liquidation estate under Section 36(4)(a)(iii) and cannot be brought into the waterfall under Section 53. The absence of a separately maintained fund does not remove that statutory protection, and such dues must be provided for from the corporate debtor's available funds. The Tribunal therefore found the claim could not be treated as a distribution claim and remitted the matter for fresh examination in accordance with law. It also held that provident fund dues relatable to a separate legal entity could not be fastened on the corporate debtor, as distinct entities carry separate liabilities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
