Advance pricing agreement methodology can guide benchmarking for non-covered years when functions, assets, risks and activities remain materially unch...
Tax-audit exemption for substantially State-funded educational universities prevents audit-failure penalties where income qualifies for statutory exem...
Functional, asset and risk analysis excludes diversified technology companies from captive software development comparables under cost-plus arrangemen...
Mobile-phone electronic evidence failed to establish customs undervaluation, while duty survived on non-authentic origin certificates without importer...
Automotive radio classification treats integrated infotainment features as supplementary, placing complete and qualifying unassembled units under the ...
Separate corporate personality prevents directors from being personally liable for company deposits without a guarantee or independent legal undertaki...
Assessment limitation following remand of a transfer-pricing...
Limitation after transfer-pricing remand: fresh TPO reference did not extend the assessment deadline, rendering the consequential assessment time-barred.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Assessment limitation following remand of a transfer-pricing issue is governed by section 153(3) where the remand is to the Assessing Officer under Rule 28 and requires verification and a hearing. A fresh reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer, absent fresh satisfaction under section 92CA(1), does not attract section 153(4) or extend the completion period; the consequential assessment was therefore quashed as time-barred. Although quoting a DIN in Dispute Resolution Panel directions is mandatory, omission from the directions did not invalidate them where a separate authenticated intimation identified the directions and carried the DIN. The DIN objection was rejected.
Assessment limitation following remand of a transfer-pricing issue is governed by section 153(3) where the remand is to the Assessing Officer under Rule 28 and requires verification and a hearing. A fresh reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer, absent fresh satisfaction under section 92CA(1), does not attract section 153(4) or extend the completion period; the consequential assessment was therefore quashed as time-barred. Although quoting a DIN in Dispute Resolution Panel directions is mandatory, omission from the directions did not invalidate them where a separate authenticated intimation identified the directions and carried the DIN. The DIN objection was rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4901 
