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...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Where an assessee permits its bank account and charitable status to be used for routing funds and claims exemption under sections 11 and 12 on that basis, it cannot avoid taxability by describing itself as a mere conduit. The Tribunal found that the assessee was a party to the arrangement by which donations were routed through its account and shown as application for educational purposes, while the funds were effectively taken back by the beneficiary group. The reliance on an earlier pass-through case was held distinguishable. The addition was upheld in the assessee's hands, the plea that only the ultimate beneficiary could be taxed was rejected, and the appeal was dismissed.
Where an assessee permits its bank account and charitable status to be used for routing funds and claims exemption under sections 11 and 12 on that basis, it cannot avoid taxability by describing itself as a mere conduit. The Tribunal found that the assessee was a party to the arrangement by which donations were routed through its account and shown as application for educational purposes, while the funds were effectively taken back by the beneficiary group. The reliance on an earlier pass-through case was held distinguishable. The addition was upheld in the assessee's hands, the plea that only the ultimate beneficiary could be taxed was rejected, and the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
