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...
A borrower account fraud classification was quashed where the bank relied on a transaction audit report already found insufficient to support undervaluation, preferential or fraudulent transactions, and also on undisclosed Joint Lenders Meeting material. Because those materials were not supplied in the show cause notice or otherwise disclosed, the petitioners had no effective opportunity to respond, and the bank could not cure the defect by later referring to an FIR that had not formed part of the original decision-making record. The Court held that the process violated audi alteram partem and that the impugned order was non-speaking, while reserving liberty to proceed afresh in accordance with law and RBI directions.
A borrower account fraud classification was quashed where the bank relied on a transaction audit report already found insufficient to support undervaluation, preferential or fraudulent transactions, and also on undisclosed Joint Lenders Meeting material. Because those materials were not supplied in the show cause notice or otherwise disclosed, the petitioners had no effective opportunity to respond, and the bank could not cure the defect by later referring to an FIR that had not formed part of the original decision-making record. The Court held that the process violated audi alteram partem and that the impugned order was non-speaking, while reserving liberty to proceed afresh in accordance with law and RBI directions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
