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" ?
Writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised in tax matters where an efficacious statutory appeal exists, and the petitioner's challenges to classification, exemption, annuity receipts, composite supply, notifications and circulars were held to fall within the appellate framework. The Court found no exceptional ground such as patent lack of jurisdiction or violation of natural justice, noting that the petitioner had participated in adjudication and was heard. It also held that the Additional Director, DGGI, and the Additional Commissioner, CGST, were validly empowered as proper officers under the statutory notifications to issue the notice and adjudicate it. The writ petition was dismissed with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal.
Writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised in tax matters where an efficacious statutory appeal exists, and the petitioner's challenges to classification, exemption, annuity receipts, composite supply, notifications and circulars were held to fall within the appellate framework. The Court found no exceptional ground such as patent lack of jurisdiction or violation of natural justice, noting that the petitioner had participated in adjudication and was heard. It also held that the Additional Director, DGGI, and the Additional Commissioner, CGST, were validly empowered as proper officers under the statutory notifications to issue the notice and adjudicate it. The writ petition was dismissed with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.