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...
A High Court considered a request to modify a bail condition requiring a security bond equal to the amount claimed. It held that the condition only required furnishing a security bond and did not require advance deposit of money or a bank guarantee, so the authorities cited by the applicant were inapplicable because the condition was materially different. The Court also held that it should not re-examine the issue after the same condition had already been challenged before the Supreme Court, and that withdrawing the condition would effectively amount to an impermissible review of the earlier bail order. The application was dismissed.
A High Court considered a request to modify a bail condition requiring a security bond equal to the amount claimed. It held that the condition only required furnishing a security bond and did not require advance deposit of money or a bank guarantee, so the authorities cited by the applicant were inapplicable because the condition was materially different. The Court also held that it should not re-examine the issue after the same condition had already been challenged before the Supreme Court, and that withdrawing the condition would effectively amount to an impermissible review of the earlier bail order. The application was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
