<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Limitation after transfer-pricing remand: fresh TPO reference did not extend the assessment deadline, rendering the consequential assessment time-barred.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104657</link>
    <description>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.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 08:45:20 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 08:45:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928526" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Limitation after transfer-pricing remand: fresh TPO reference did not extend the assessment deadline, rendering the consequential assessment time-barred.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104657</link>
      <description>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.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 08:45:20 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104657</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>