Alternative statutory remedy and delay bar GST writ challenges despite pending rectification, while distinct subject matter permits parallel proceedin...
Unverified Insight Portal Information Cannot Justify Reassessment Without a Verified Taxpayer-Specific Income-Escape Nexus or Demonstrated Application...
Assessing Officer jurisdiction after statutory transfer invalidates reassessment notices issued by transferor officers and nullifies resulting proceed...
Consequential appeal-effect orders must implement rectification deleting working-capital adjustments and reconsider the resulting arm's-length range c...
Discounted cash flow valuation protects share premium where projections are reasonable, while audited book expenses defeat unexplained-expenditure add...
Section 54 construction relief survives pre-transfer commencement when completion occurs within the statutory period, excluding ineligible spouse-owne...
Page of 4915
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
921 to 940 of 98300 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 4915 
