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...
Remittances to Indian NRE accounts were held explained where the assessee produced tax residency certificates, foreign tax returns, bank statements and Indian account records showing long-standing foreign income and accumulated savings. The Tribunal found that the funds were transferred through banking channels with a direct nexus to the foreign bank account, so the explanation could not be rejected merely for non-compliance at assessment stage or for comparing remittances with the wrong income period. Because the remittances were satisfactorily explained, the linked investment in immovable property was also not treated as unexplained. The additions under section 69 were deleted.
Remittances to Indian NRE accounts were held explained where the assessee produced tax residency certificates, foreign tax returns, bank statements and Indian account records showing long-standing foreign income and accumulated savings. The Tribunal found that the funds were transferred through banking channels with a direct nexus to the foreign bank account, so the explanation could not be rejected merely for non-compliance at assessment stage or for comparing remittances with the wrong income period. Because the remittances were satisfactorily explained, the linked investment in immovable property was also not treated as unexplained. The additions under section 69 were deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
