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...
The Appellate Tribunal held that flats purchased with consideration paid by the appellant, but registered in the names of others who did not pay for them, fell within the statutory definition of benami transaction. It further held that the amended definition under Section 2(9)(A) covered property still held in benamidars' names after the 2016 amendment, so the challenge based on pre-amendment origin failed. The objection that provisional attachment concerned non-existent property was also rejected because allotment letters were issued, consideration was paid, and registered agreements existed. Provisional attachment and its confirmation were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.
The Appellate Tribunal held that flats purchased with consideration paid by the appellant, but registered in the names of others who did not pay for them, fell within the statutory definition of benami transaction. It further held that the amended definition under Section 2(9)(A) covered property still held in benamidars' names after the 2016 amendment, so the challenge based on pre-amendment origin failed. The objection that provisional attachment concerned non-existent property was also rejected because allotment letters were issued, consideration was paid, and registered agreements existed. Provisional attachment and its confirmation were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.