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...
Where a statutory rectification remedy is available against an order disallowing input tax credit, the writ court will not examine whether the claim falls within the retrospectively extended cases at that stage. The Court held that the issue should first be considered by the competent authority in rectification proceedings, particularly where paragraph 3.5 provides such a remedy after an order under section 73 and no appeal has been filed. The writ petition was disposed of without deciding the merits, and the petitioner was given liberty to file a rectification application, which the authority must hear and decide in accordance with law.
Where a statutory rectification remedy is available against an order disallowing input tax credit, the writ court will not examine whether the claim falls within the retrospectively extended cases at that stage. The Court held that the issue should first be considered by the competent authority in rectification proceedings, particularly where paragraph 3.5 provides such a remedy after an order under section 73 and no appeal has been filed. The writ petition was disposed of without deciding the merits, and the petitioner was given liberty to file a rectification application, which the authority must hear and decide in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.