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...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Validity of order passed u/s 147 r.w.s.144B - availability of alternate statutory remedy - The High Court recognized that the arguments presented could be considered by examining the record. However, the Court refrained from conducting a fishing inquiry into the case under its writ jurisdiction due to factual complexities. - The High Court referred to Supreme Court decisions emphasizing the importance of exhausting statutory remedies before approaching the court under Article 226 of the Constitution. It held that when an alternate remedy is available, judicial prudence dictates refraining from exercising jurisdiction under constitutional provisions. Therefore, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to avail themselves of the statutory remedy of appeal.
Validity of order passed u/s 147 r.w.s.144B - availability of alternate statutory remedy - The High Court recognized that the arguments presented could be considered by examining the record. However, the Court refrained from conducting a fishing inquiry into the case under its writ jurisdiction due to factual complexities. - The High Court referred to Supreme Court decisions emphasizing the importance of exhausting statutory remedies before approaching the court under Article 226 of the Constitution. It held that when an alternate remedy is available, judicial prudence dictates refraining from exercising jurisdiction under constitutional provisions. Therefore, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to avail themselves of the statutory remedy of appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
