Search: reassessment

3 results for “reassessment”+ Section 92Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai61 Delhi45 Bangalore29 Ahmedabad18 Hyderabad14 Kolkata9 Chennai8 Pune7 Karnataka5 Jaipur3 Panaji1 Calcutta1 SC1 Surat1

Key Topics

Section 92C6 Transfer Pricing3 Addition to Income3 Section 271(1)(c)2 Section 143(3)2 Section 144C2 Penalty2 Comparables/TP2 TP Method2

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 730/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta (C.A.) &For Respondent: Smt. Roli Agarwal (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

92C of the IT Act in good faith and due diligence and has brought out the same in its transfer pricing study report. 25. It was submitted that the Ld. AO has not been able to establish that ‘good faith’ and ‘due diligence’ was not exercised by the appellant and has failed to discharge the onus cast upon

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. JAIPUR RUGS COMPANY (P) LTD., JAIPUR