Income-tax prosecution fails when appellate remand removes its factual foundation; directors require company arraignment for vicarious criminal liabil...
Capital character of assignment consideration prevents taxation as residuary income, while unsupported interest-related expenditure remains non-deduct...
Make-available condition shields regional support-service receipts from Indian taxation where no independent capability or permanent establishment exi...
Transfer-pricing treatment of corporate guarantees and convertible loans followed prior-year consistency, with taxable foreign dividends excluded from...
Transfer-pricing benchmarking confines adjustments to associated-enterprise transactions and integrates delayed receivables through TNMM working-capit...
Medical relief status protects government-contracted mobile healthcare from commercial classification, while provisional registration cancellation req...
Charitable registration cancellation requires proof that educational activities abandoned their objects; incidental receipts and retained surplus are ...
Defective service of a GST show-cause notice and adjudication order through an incorrect common-portal tab justified condonation of delay in filing the GST appeal. Uploading a notice on the portal alone was treated as insufficient service where there was no acknowledgement or reply, and belated recovery action supported the taxpayer's claim that the order appeared under "Additional Notices and Orders" rather than the designated tab. Although the Appellate Authority was bound by the statutory limitation period, refusal to hear the appeal would cause grave prejudice where the delay arose from circumstances beyond the taxpayer's control. The appeal was directed to be entertained and decided on merits if filed within the stipulated period.
Defective service of a GST show-cause notice and adjudication order through an incorrect common-portal tab justified condonation of delay in filing the GST appeal. Uploading a notice on the portal alone was treated as insufficient service where there was no acknowledgement or reply, and belated recovery action supported the taxpayer's claim that the order appeared under "Additional Notices and Orders" rather than the designated tab. Although the Appellate Authority was bound by the statutory limitation period, refusal to hear the appeal would cause grave prejudice where the delay arose from circumstances beyond the taxpayer's control. The appeal was directed to be entertained and decided on merits if filed within the stipulated period.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4884 
