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...
Appellate proceedings cannot be used to introduce a new head of income or enhance an assessment without following the prescribed procedure. Where the original dispute concerned only denial of deduction under section 54F on the basis of alleged multiple residential units and a claimed sham transfer, and the appellate authority accepted that the transfer was lawful, that controversy stood concluded. The further step of taxing the share-sale consideration under section 56 amounted to an unauthorised enhancement and a change in the basis of assessment. The appellate order was therefore unsustainable, and the deduction under section 54F was directed to be allowed.
Appellate proceedings cannot be used to introduce a new head of income or enhance an assessment without following the prescribed procedure. Where the original dispute concerned only denial of deduction under section 54F on the basis of alleged multiple residential units and a claimed sham transfer, and the appellate authority accepted that the transfer was lawful, that controversy stood concluded. The further step of taxing the share-sale consideration under section 56 amounted to an unauthorised enhancement and a change in the basis of assessment. The appellate order was therefore unsustainable, and the deduction under section 54F was directed to be allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
