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...
Levy of penalty at the rate of 200% of the tax (GST) payable - Detention of escalator machine (JCB) - JCB machine was returning from work - The High Court observed that, there was a valid e-way bill in support of the transportation. It is only because of non-production of the delivery challan that the penalty has been assessed and imposed. Though possession of all document in support of transportation is the fundamental requirement of law, but as it appears that, the petitioner did not have the intention to evade tax , accordingly, imposition of penalty at the rate of 200% of the tax payable appears to be highly disproportionate and not in accordance with the provisions of law. - HC directed the adjudicating authority to re-adjudicate the issue.
Levy of penalty at the rate of 200% of the tax (GST) payable - Detention of escalator machine (JCB) - JCB machine was returning from work - The High Court observed that, there was a valid e-way bill in support of the transportation. It is only because of non-production of the delivery challan that the penalty has been assessed and imposed. Though possession of all document in support of transportation is the fundamental requirement of law, but as it appears that, the petitioner did not have the intention to evade tax , accordingly, imposition of penalty at the rate of 200% of the tax payable appears to be highly disproportionate and not in accordance with the provisions of law. - HC directed the adjudicating authority to re-adjudicate the issue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
