Validity of order passed by jurisdictional AO not in compliance ...

Order Validity Challenged Over Section 144B Non-Compliance; TP Adjustments and Loss Set-Offs Addressed.

July 8, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Validity of order passed by jurisdictional AO not in compliance with section 144B discussed; technical glitches faced by revenue leading to transfer by PCIT to jurisdictional AO not reflected on ITBA portal; circular dated 06.09.2021 and letter dated 01.08.2023 clarified order transfer with CBDT approval. TP adjustment - comparable selection - deselection of comparables for turnover exceeding 200 crores against assessee's 14.53 crores in ITeS segment. Deselection of Manipal Digital Systems Pvt. Ltd. for lacking segmental service details. Working capital adjustment allowed following Coordinate Bench decision in Huawei Technologies India case. Non-granting of set-off of brought forward losses against final adjustment erroneous; AO directed to grant set-off. ITAT = Appellate Tribunal.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Validity of order passed by jurisdictional AO not in compliance ...

Order Validity Challenged Over Section 144B Non-Compliance; TP Adjustments and Loss Set-Offs Addressed.

July 8, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

The ITAT Mumbai addressed errors in capital gain computation. The Assessee's claim of ₹ 859,680 was accepted over the AO's ₹ 791,221. An application u/s 154...

The ITAT ruled that the assessee is entitled to set off brought forward losses from AYs 2012-13 and 2013-14 against profits earned in AY 2017-18. The Tribunal clarified...

Set-off of current year losses against the addition made u/s 68 - going through sub-Section (2) of Section 115BBE of the Act, the words “set off of any loss” appearing...

Mode and manner of set off of loss - loss from one head set off against other head of income - business loss should be first set off against income from house property...

Set off of loss brought forward losses - conditions of 51% shareholding - the assessee is not seeking carry forward of losses to be set off but the assessee is seeking...

Incorrect set off of brought forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation - The working of the Ld. AO contains the mistakes as they are not in consonance with the...

Set off of losses with the surrendered income - the restriction shall apply to assessment year 2017-18 onwards. Accordingly, for the year under consideration, there is...

Set off of loss incurred on sale of polished diamond goods against deemed income assessed u/s. 69A - set off against the income declared during the course of search -...

Disallowing set off of losses claimed by the appellant set-off of business losses and carried forward losses against the undisclosed income - We are of the view...

Set off of brought forward non speculative loss against the current years speculative income - Set off of loss from one head against income from another - there is no...

Set off of brought forward business loss - mistakes in previous years for not claiming benefit of set-off - 8 years time limit provided in the statute - The ITAT found...

The Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) considered a case involving Transfer Pricing (TP) adjustments for both US and non-US transactions. The Tax Authorities computed TP...

Setting off the long term capital loss arising on sale of shares not subject to STT against long term capital gain arising from sale of Shares subjected to STT exempt...

Disallowance of setting off of the carried forward loss - return filed beyond the due date specified under subsection (1) of section 139 - It was argued that the delay...

Exemption u/s 10B - 100% EOU - there was a loss in the Unit eligible for deduction u/s. 10B and there was a business income in an another Unit. Therefore, while...

Quick Updates: