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...
Reopening of assessment was upheld where the recorded reasons showed fresh tangible material from impounded documents and a director's statement, and the assessee had not fully disclosed the crucial Clause 7 entitlement to 35% of gross sale receipts; no earlier opinion on the receipt's true character had been formed, so change of opinion did not apply. The Court also held that reopening must stand or fall on the recorded reasons alone. On the merits, the assessee's 35% entitlement under the AOP agreement was not a share of profit, because it arose from gross receipts before project expenses and was diverted by overriding title; it was therefore taxable as business income.
Reopening of assessment was upheld where the recorded reasons showed fresh tangible material from impounded documents and a director's statement, and the assessee had not fully disclosed the crucial Clause 7 entitlement to 35% of gross sale receipts; no earlier opinion on the receipt's true character had been formed, so change of opinion did not apply. The Court also held that reopening must stand or fall on the recorded reasons alone. On the merits, the assessee's 35% entitlement under the AOP agreement was not a share of profit, because it arose from gross receipts before project expenses and was diverted by overriding title; it was therefore taxable as business income.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
