If foundational facts could not be established by way of writ petition, the taxpayer should be relegated to adopt proceedings before various Income-ta

Court: Supreme Court

Citation: Coca Cola India Inc. Vs. ACIT & Ors. (SC) [Appeal (Civil) No. 646/200)] (Judgement dated 25 November 2010)

Brief : Supreme Court directs that since, foundational facts could not be established by way of writ petition, the taxpayer should be relegated to adopt proceedings before various Income-tax authorities. Thus, the Supreme Court has confirmed the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court allowing Assessing Officer / Transfer Pricing Officer to continue with the reassessment proceedings.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court (Supreme Court in the context of Transfer Pricing Provisions of Section 92 to 92F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), has directed Assessing Officer (AO)/ Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) to expeditiously hear and dispose of pending proceedings and to decide independently on the merits of case, uninfluenced by the observations of the Punjab and Haryana High Court (High Court).

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.