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...
A civil suit seeking a declaration that personal guarantees stood released remained maintainable because it was filed before any application under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code; Section 96 is triggered only on such filing, so a later interim moratorium could at most stay the pending suit for the limited statutory period and not bar it under Order VII Rule 11(d). The court also held that a declaratory suit to establish release from personal guarantees lies within civil jurisdiction, and Section 231 must be construed strictly so as not to oust jurisdiction beyond the Code's specific coverage. Rejection of the plaint was therefore unsustainable and the suit was remanded.
A civil suit seeking a declaration that personal guarantees stood released remained maintainable because it was filed before any application under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code; Section 96 is triggered only on such filing, so a later interim moratorium could at most stay the pending suit for the limited statutory period and not bar it under Order VII Rule 11(d). The court also held that a declaratory suit to establish release from personal guarantees lies within civil jurisdiction, and Section 231 must be construed strictly so as not to oust jurisdiction beyond the Code's specific coverage. Rejection of the plaint was therefore unsustainable and the suit was remanded.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
