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...
Challenge to assessment order levying 100% penalty was dismissed by High Court. Court held that impugned orders u/s 74 of GST enactments do not warrant interference under Article 226 due to limited scope. No extenuating reasons to extend relief to petitioner. Petitioner can raise grievances before Appellate Authority under GST enactments hierarchy.
Challenge to assessment order levying 100% penalty was dismissed by High Court. Court held that impugned orders u/s 74 of GST enactments do not warrant interference under Article 226 due to limited scope. No extenuating reasons to extend relief to petitioner. Petitioner can raise grievances before Appellate Authority under GST enactments hierarchy.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.