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 payment made during search proceedings is not voluntary merely because it is routed through Form GST DRC-03; for Section 74(5) to apply, the record must show independent self-ascertainment or prior ascertainment of liability. On the facts described, no notice had been issued, the search was still continuing, and the petitioner's records and devices remained under departmental control, so the deposit was treated as involuntary and refundable. The declaration in DRC-03 and the absence of DRC-04 were only relevant circumstances, not conclusive proof of voluntariness. Interest on the refund was left open because tax liability had not yet been finally adjudicated.
A payment made during search proceedings is not voluntary merely because it is routed through Form GST DRC-03; for Section 74(5) to apply, the record must show independent self-ascertainment or prior ascertainment of liability. On the facts described, no notice had been issued, the search was still continuing, and the petitioner's records and devices remained under departmental control, so the deposit was treated as involuntary and refundable. The declaration in DRC-03 and the absence of DRC-04 were only relevant circumstances, not conclusive proof of voluntariness. Interest on the refund was left open because tax liability had not yet been finally adjudicated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.