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...
Under the GST law, proceedings initiated in the name of a deceased assessee were not invalidated where the death had not been intimated to the department. The HC further noted that, even if recourse to the extended limitation under Section 74 was unavailable, proceedings under Section 73 could still be maintained because of the limitation extensions under Section 168A and the Supreme Court's exclusion of limitation in Re: Cognizance; objections based on absence of Section 74 ingredients and limitation were rejected. The Court also affirmed that a legal representative is liable, out of the estate, for tax dues of the deceased, but set aside the ex parte assessment orders and remitted the matters for fresh adjudication on merits.
Under the GST law, proceedings initiated in the name of a deceased assessee were not invalidated where the death had not been intimated to the department. The HC further noted that, even if recourse to the extended limitation under Section 74 was unavailable, proceedings under Section 73 could still be maintained because of the limitation extensions under Section 168A and the Supreme Court's exclusion of limitation in Re: Cognizance; objections based on absence of Section 74 ingredients and limitation were rejected. The Court also affirmed that a legal representative is liable, out of the estate, for tax dues of the deceased, but set aside the ex parte assessment orders and remitted the matters for fresh adjudication on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
