S. 147 : Reassessment-Sales promotion expenses-No new information-Reassessment is held to be bad in law. [S. 37(1), 148]
Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 184 ITD 8 / 207 TTJ 143 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 147 : Reassessment-Sales promotion expenses-No new information-Reassessment is held to be bad in law. [S. 37(1), 148]
Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 184 ITD 8 / 207 TTJ 143 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 147 : Reassessment-Under invoicing-Cash credits-Report of commission- Reassessment proceedings initiated merely on basis of report of a Commission appointed by Central Government that there was under invoicing of exports-Held to be bad in law-Pronouncement of order-Period during which lockdown was in force in country due to COVID 19 pandemic was to be excluded. [S. 68, 148, 255, ITAT R. 35]
Ashapura Minichem Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 81 ITR 111 / 184 ITD 278 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 147 : Reassessment-Internal audit objection-Reimbursement of expenses-Failure to deduct tax at source-Reassessment is held to be not valid-90 days time period permitted under Rule 34(5) for pronouncing order was to be computed by deducting Covid-19 pandemic lockdown period. [S. 40(a)(ia), 148, 195, 255, ITATR. 34(5)]
Lionbridge Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 184 ITD 61 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 145 : Method of accounting-Rehabilitation and implementation of water supply-Percentage of contract method adopted by the assessee is held to be justified.
Veolia India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 184 ITD 528 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 145 : Method of accounting-Rejection of books of account without providing an opportunity is held to be not valid-Cash credits-Rejection of documents without any reason is held to be not justified-Matter remanded. [S. 68]
Ramanlal K. Darji v. ITO (2020) 184 ITD 408 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 143(3) : Assessment-Amalgamation-Succession to business otherwise than on death-Amalgamating company was not in existence at time of conduct of assessment proceedings as well as on date of passing Assessment Order-Assessment Order passed in name of amalgamating company being void ab initio was to be set aside. [S. 170, 292B]
Genpact India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 184 ITD 1 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 115JB : Book profit-Computation for purpose of clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without restoring to computation as contemplated under section 14A, read with rule 8D. [S. 14A, R. 8D]
Zaveri & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 184 ITD 777 (Ahd.)(Trib.)S. 115JB : Book profit-Additional revenue on account of subsequent realization of export-Addition cannot be made while computing book profit. [S. 10A]
Dy.CIT v. Yahoo Software Development (P.) Ltd. (2020) 80 ITR 528 / 184 ITD 305/ 196 DTR 241/208 TTJ 1072 (Bang.) (Trib.)S. 92CA : Reference to transfer pricing officer-There was no transfer pricing adjustment of more than 10 crores in earlier year-Assessing Officers reference to TPO was in contravention to Instruction No. 3 of 2016 and such reference was to be declared as invalid. [S. 92C]
Sava Healthcare Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 184 ITD 312 / 189 DTR 1 / 78 ITR 65 (SN) / 204 TTJ 513 (Pune)(Trib.)S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comparable-company engaged in the business of investment banking, merchant banking, merger and acquisition, private equity, syndication, etc. cannot be compared to non-binding investment advisory service provider.
Khazanah India Advisors Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 184 ITD 890 (Mum.)(Trib.)