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...
Recovery of CENVAT Credit erroneously refunded alongwith interest - penalty for ineligible availment of CENVAT Credit - The High Court emphasized that the refund and interest were paid to the petitioner based on these orders, and there was no basis for recovery. - The High Court noted that the Show Cause Notice erroneously mentioned the filing of an SLP, although it was yet to be filed. It held that the Revenue cannot unilaterally declare the refund as erroneous, especially after being unsuccessful in previous legal proceedings. - The High Court acknowledged the Revenue's right to approach the Supreme Court but emphasized that until the Revenue succeeds there or obtains interim orders, the refund cannot be deemed erroneous.
Recovery of CENVAT Credit erroneously refunded alongwith interest - penalty for ineligible availment of CENVAT Credit - The High Court emphasized that the refund and interest were paid to the petitioner based on these orders, and there was no basis for recovery. - The High Court noted that the Show Cause Notice erroneously mentioned the filing of an SLP, although it was yet to be filed. It held that the Revenue cannot unilaterally declare the refund as erroneous, especially after being unsuccessful in previous legal proceedings. - The High Court acknowledged the Revenue's right to approach the Supreme Court but emphasized that until the Revenue succeeds there or obtains interim orders, the refund cannot be deemed erroneous.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
