Income Tax : Budget 2026 introduces sweeping retrospective amendments affecting limitation, reassessment jurisdiction, DIN validity, and TPO ti...
Income Tax : Courts are divided on whether the DRP-specific deadline under Section 144C(13) overrides the general assessment time bar in Sectio...
Income Tax : Taxpayers face challenges when assessment orders don’t reflect DRP directions. Misalignments lead to disputes, rectification iss...
Income Tax : The legal community awaits the Supreme Court decision on the Roca Bathroom case, addressing timelines for transfer pricing assessm...
Income Tax : Discover how Section 44C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, governs the deduction of head office expenses for non-resident businesses in...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT allows Sanco Holding, a Norwegian company, to compute income from bareboat charter of seismic vessels under Article 21(...
Income Tax : The ITAT observed that mere remote access to customer-owned systems does not satisfy the disposal and permanence tests required fo...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi ruled that reimbursement of software costs to foreign AEs on a cost-to-cost basis could not be treated as a profit-...
Income Tax : Tribunal found the DRP’s order cryptic and lacking proper analysis on similarity of business activities between the assessee and...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that margins agreed under a Bilateral Advance Pricing Agreement may be used for non-covered AEs when transactio...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT directed exclusion of a comparable company engaged in video conferencing solutions after noting that the DRP had alread...
The Tribunal held that the TPO failed to consider the assessee’s Internal CUP benchmarking despite directions from the DRP. It directed fresh examination using the correct method and excluded certain NCDs from adjustment.
The ITAT held that provision for dealer incentives under a sales promotion scheme was based on a scientific method and not a contingent liability. The disallowance made by the tax authorities was therefore deleted.
ITAT Delhi held that while selecting the comparables transactions or entities, in case of international transactions, the basis should be one of similarity with the control transactions/entities and mere broad similarity is not sufficient.
The Tribunal ruled that an assessment order passed after DRP directions is still subject to revision under Section 263. It held that there is no statutory bar preventing the Principal Commissioner from revising such orders.
The tribunal examined whether the reasons given for late filing of the appeal were sufficient. It ruled that routine administrative workload and grievance handling cannot explain a substantial delay.
ITAT Delhi held that Oracle India Private Limited is an independent legal entity and existence of Oracle India Private Limited cannot be considered as permanent establishment of Oracle Systems Corporation. Hence, there is not question of attribution of profit to Permanent Establishment.
The ITAT held that when non-jurisdictional High Courts give conflicting decisions, a division bench ruling should be preferred over a single judge decision. On that basis, the Tribunal rejected the assessee’s claim that the assessment order was time-barred.
The Tribunal removed the transfer pricing addition on delayed receivables from associated enterprises, holding that the company’s profit margins exceeded comparable companies and interest was already embedded in pricing.
Budget 2026 introduces sweeping retrospective amendments affecting limitation, reassessment jurisdiction, DIN validity, and TPO timelines. The changes directly impact ongoing appeals, rectification, revision, and reassessment proceedings, altering litigation strategy for taxpayers and authorities alike.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that property payments were properly explained with bank records and affidavits. Additions under Section 69 for cash deposit and stamp duty were deleted.
