Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
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...
Transfer of MHADA-reserved flats after the occupancy certificate was held taxable as works contract service, not a GST-exempt sale of immovable property. The post-completion exclusion did not apply because the applicant had undertaken a binding pre-approval obligation to construct and transfer the earmarked flats, and received additional FSI as non-monetary consideration in return. Since GST consideration includes non-cash benefits, the supply was not wholly post-occupancy and remained within Schedule II. For valuation, the Authority held that the price paid by MHADA allottees was not the sole consideration and that the MHADA-administered rate was not open market value. GST value had to be based on comparable flats sold to non-MHADA buyers in the same project.
Transfer of MHADA-reserved flats after the occupancy certificate was held taxable as works contract service, not a GST-exempt sale of immovable property. The post-completion exclusion did not apply because the applicant had undertaken a binding pre-approval obligation to construct and transfer the earmarked flats, and received additional FSI as non-monetary consideration in return. Since GST consideration includes non-cash benefits, the supply was not wholly post-occupancy and remained within Schedule II. For valuation, the Authority held that the price paid by MHADA allottees was not the sole consideration and that the MHADA-administered rate was not open market value. GST value had to be based on comparable flats sold to non-MHADA buyers in the same project.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
