Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
321 to 340 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Blocking input tax credit under Rule 86A requires the competent authority itself to record, in writing, reasons to believe based on relevant material and an independent application of mind. An order stating only that action was taken "as per recommendation" of a Superintendent fails this mandatory jurisdictional requirement and shows that the authority acted on dictate rather than formed its own belief. Material referred to in the counter-affidavit or alert circular cannot cure the defect when the impugned order itself discloses no objective reason. The ITC-blocking order was set aside, with liberty to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Blocking input tax credit under Rule 86A requires the competent authority itself to record, in writing, reasons to believe based on relevant material and an independent application of mind. An order stating only that action was taken "as per recommendation" of a Superintendent fails this mandatory jurisdictional requirement and shows that the authority acted on dictate rather than formed its own belief. Material referred to in the counter-affidavit or alert circular cannot cure the defect when the impugned order itself discloses no objective reason. The ITC-blocking order was set aside, with liberty to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
