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...
NDPS - Power to seize and arrest of a person in a public place - Smuggling - Ganja - Samples being taken at the CGST Bhawan - The High Court found that the officers involved were duly authorized and acted within their powers under the NDPS Act. It was established that the search and seizure were conducted in compliance with Section 43 of the NDPS Act, which pertains to actions in public places. The Court held that the procedural requirements were met, including the immediate forwarding of seized items for chemical analysis and the safekeeping of the seized narcotics. - The appeals of appellants directly involved with the narcotics in the truck were dismissed, and their convictions were upheld based on the corroborative evidence of seizure and compliance with the NDPS procedural requirements. The appeals of two appellants, argued to be not present at the scene and implicated mainly through inadmissible confessional statements, were allowed, and their convictions were set aside.
NDPS - Power to seize and arrest of a person in a public place - Smuggling - Ganja - Samples being taken at the CGST Bhawan - The High Court found that the officers involved were duly authorized and acted within their powers under the NDPS Act. It was established that the search and seizure were conducted in compliance with Section 43 of the NDPS Act, which pertains to actions in public places. The Court held that the procedural requirements were met, including the immediate forwarding of seized items for chemical analysis and the safekeeping of the seized narcotics. - The appeals of appellants directly involved with the narcotics in the truck were dismissed, and their convictions were upheld based on the corroborative evidence of seizure and compliance with the NDPS procedural requirements. The appeals of two appellants, argued to be not present at the scene and implicated mainly through inadmissible confessional statements, were allowed, and their convictions were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
