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 based on information from the Investigation Wing was invalid because the recorded reasons showed only suspicion and a request for scrutiny, not an independent reason to believe that income had escaped assessment. The Tribunal held that borrowed satisfaction, without the Assessing Officer's own enquiry or a live link between material and escapement, could not sustain reassessment. It also held that assessment could not stand because no valid notice under section 143(2) was issued for the relevant assessment year; a notice for a different year was not a curable typographical error. The reassessment and assessment order were quashed and the appeal was allowed.
Reopening based on information from the Investigation Wing was invalid because the recorded reasons showed only suspicion and a request for scrutiny, not an independent reason to believe that income had escaped assessment. The Tribunal held that borrowed satisfaction, without the Assessing Officer's own enquiry or a live link between material and escapement, could not sustain reassessment. It also held that assessment could not stand because no valid notice under section 143(2) was issued for the relevant assessment year; a notice for a different year was not a curable typographical error. The reassessment and assessment order were quashed and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
