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...
The High Court considered the maintainability of a refund claim regarding GST on health care services. The court noted the principle of unjust enrichment and the availability of alternative remedies like appeal u/s 107 of the Act. It emphasized that the power of writs under Article 226 is discretionary, with the existence of an alternative remedy generally barring its use. The court found that the petitioners had not shown the orders to be without jurisdiction, nor challenged the legislation's validity. Therefore, the court dismissed the petition, stating that the petitioners had an alternative efficacious remedy through the statutory appeal process.
The High Court considered the maintainability of a refund claim regarding GST on health care services. The court noted the principle of unjust enrichment and the availability of alternative remedies like appeal u/s 107 of the Act. It emphasized that the power of writs under Article 226 is discretionary, with the existence of an alternative remedy generally barring its use. The court found that the petitioners had not shown the orders to be without jurisdiction, nor challenged the legislation's validity. Therefore, the court dismissed the petition, stating that the petitioners had an alternative efficacious remedy through the statutory appeal process.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
