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...
Payment of duty from inadmissible CENVAT credit availed - If a person deposits such sum under mistake he may also claim refund thereof and if Government of India intends to withhold the same, the same may be branded as withholding the amount without authority of law. However in the present case the situation is different. The amount was not deposited in cash but by encashing CENVAT credit. - It is an instance of depositing certain sum with Government of India which was not payable. We therefore are in agreement with the view of appellate and revisional authorities that by this means the petitioner cannot claim refund of the amount which was offered through CENVAT credit. - HC
Payment of duty from inadmissible CENVAT credit availed - If a person deposits such sum under mistake he may also claim refund thereof and if Government of India intends to withhold the same, the same may be branded as withholding the amount without authority of law. However in the present case the situation is different. The amount was not deposited in cash but by encashing CENVAT credit. - It is an instance of depositing certain sum with Government of India which was not payable. We therefore are in agreement with the view of appellate and revisional authorities that by this means the petitioner cannot claim refund of the amount which was offered through CENVAT credit. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.