Section 237 of the Income Tax Act
The decision most relied on for Section 237 is Autodesk India Pvt.Ltd. v. DCIT (96 Taxmann.com 263), cited in 116 of the 80 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.
Leading authorities on Section 237
A high turnover criterion, such as above Rs. 200 crores, is a valid ground to exclude companies from the list of comparable companies in a transfer pricing analysis, as such companies are not comparable to those with significantly lower turnover.
Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 cannot be initiated based on a mere change of opinion or reappraisal of existing facts, but require new or fresh tangible material or information indicating escapement of income.
The case elucidates the meaning of 'management services', detailing its components and considering whether such services qualify as 'technical services' for income tax purposes, particularly in relation to fees for technical services.
Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT) is a tax on the profits of the domestic company, not on the shareholder. The Supreme Court's decision in Tata Tea Co. Ltd. did not address the precise nature of DDT as a tax on the company versus the shareholder.
Reassessment proceedings under Section 148 cannot be initiated if the original assessment proceedings, initiated based on a filed return, are still pending. This includes situations where the time for issuing a notice under Section 143(2) has not expired.
Reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 cannot be initiated so long as the original assessment proceedings, based on a return already filed, are pending and have not been disposed of or terminated.
Judgments on Section 237
Showing 1–20 of 80 · Page 1 of 4
